BrowserStack Reviews & Product Details

BrowserStack makes cross-browser and cross-device testing very easy without needing physical devices. I like the wide range of real browsers and devices it provides, which helps catch UI and compatibility issues early. The platform is simple to use, reliable, and saves a lot of setup time for testing across different environments. Live testing and debugging feel smooth and efficient. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Sometimes the sessions can feel slightly slow, especially when testing on older devices or during peak usage hours. Pricing can also be a bit high for small teams. In a few cases, browser or device sessions disconnect unexpectedly, which can interrupt testing and require restarting the session. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Test Observability features is a standout, providing a high level view of our playwright build health that standard logs just can't match. I love the Flaky test detection shown in my dashboard, which helps us isolate unstable tests before they pollute and CI/CD pipeline result. The ability to see failure categories and durations at a glance allows my team to priority is based on real impact. And it has turned our road test data into actionable insights for the entire engineering team. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I have noticed that the dashboard can occasionally leg when loading very high volume build histories with thousands of individual test cases. And lastly the price for high parallelism observability can become quite steep as you scale. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

BrowserStack enables me to deliver tests more efficiently thanks to its user-friendly interface and the essential features it offers. I use it nearly every week as part of my job to test web applications across various devices. My favorite aspect is the ability to run tests simultaneously on multiple devices, which makes multi-device checks much faster. The platform is very straightforward to use, and our organization has relied on BrowserStack since the very beginning. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

One area that could be improved is the occasional issue where certain devices fail to boot correctly or become unresponsive. Additionally, network or hardware-level problems can be difficult to replicate, and in these situations, physical devices sometimes reveal bugs that are not detected on BrowserStack devices. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like about the BrowserStack is easy to use and lets me test websites and apps on multiple browsers and devices without complex local setups. Live testing and screenshots work smoothly, and automated tests run reliably. The platform has a wide range of browsers and devices, which makes it convenient for comprehensive testing.

I use it every day for both manual and automated testing. Integration with our CI/CD pipeline is straightforward, and the number of features covers most real-world testing needs. Customer support is responsive when I face issues, and the platform’s interface is simple enough for quick navigation.

Interface is simple and accessible.

Implementation is moderate, initial setup is smooth with CI/CD integration.

Customer Support is responsive and helpful for troubleshooting.

Use daily for manual and automated tests. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Some devices load slowly on weaker internet connections. Advanced device settings are limited, which restricts testing certain scenarios. Automated tests occasionally fail due to timing differences with remote devices, requiring reruns. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

It's a fully fledged platform that I can find almost any feature that I need for different types of testing. Looking at smaller competitors, each of them provides some of the features, and I will need to learn different ecosystems, set them up differently, and it will make the system more complex as well Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I would like to have an easy process to activate free trials for features that have not yet activated by our organization. Many times, developers need to just use the features as a POC to see how it works and to present that POC to their peers and managers, and then decide if it's worth paying for activating that new feature. In my experience, it wasn't a smooth process and needed back-and-forth meetings with BrowseerStack. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

BrowserStack provides various features which helps in testing a software efficiently, it becomes easy to test on different devices even to integrate and test on local, it reduces time of checking in physical device also the availability os device reduces. This is being used in daily tasks, also it helps to work from remotely. It provides location change, resolutions, latest versions and many more features. It is user friendly to use, to implement just add the link on which to test and select device which reduces time of understanding. It has a good customer support, ready to help at anytime. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Sometimes it has perfomance issue, it lags while using different devices which reduces the real device experience and becomes difficult to undertsand. In some places it is high cost with respect to small teams. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

How easy it is to switch between devices/browsers and all the dev tools that help me to evaluate how things are displayed and rendered to different users. It have a variety of devices.

It's just plain simple to use. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Sometimes the browsers/devices seems laggy, but it's not a blocker and probably is a connection issue, as I am based in Brazil. Also, I noticed some differences between the dev tools (chrome and safari) that sometimes does't really work, like:

Blocking requests in Chrome does not work in some iOS browsers, but Safari does. Not a problem but maybe it would be better to keep only the devtools that support all features. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What stands out to me is how useful the entire testing platform is, especially with its advanced use of AI to reduce the amount of time testers need to spend. This combination makes the platform particularly effective. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The speed of device cloud applications can be a concern. When running manual tests on multiple devices, the process of clearing the device, installing the application, and launching the app—or even just opening a website—can sometimes take twice as long as performing the same tests on a local device. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

App accessibility scans are easy to run on real Android and iOS devices, not just emulators. It helps catch common accessibility issues early - missing labels, low contrast, improper focus order, and touch target problems. I like that accessibility checks can be combined with regular functional testing instead of being a separate activity. The reports are clear and actionable, which makes discussions with developers easier. Running accessibility checks as part of regular app QA builds awareness instead of treating accessibility as a last-minute task. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. Automated checks don’t cover all real-world accessibility scenarios, manual validation is still needed.

2. Some custom UI components get flagged in a generic way, requiring interpretation. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The automatic scans give quick feedback on common accessibility issues like missing labels, color contrast problems, and ARIA misuse. I like that accessibility checks can be run directly on real browsers and devices instead of just static pages or local tools. The issue reports are easy to understand, they clearly explain what’s wrong and why it matters, which helps during discussions with developers.

Being able to combine accessibility checks with manual testing in BrowserStack Live is extremely useful. I can inspect screen reader behavior and keyboard navigation in the same session. It fits well into our CI flow, allowing us to catch accessibility regressions early Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. Automated scans don’t catch everything, some issues still require careful manual validation.

2. Reports can get repetitive if the same issue appears across multiple pages.

3. Custom components sometimes need manual interpretation because the tool flags them generically.

4. Deeper guidance on fixing complex ARIA issues would make the reports even better. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.