BrowserStack Reviews & Product Details

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.

The platform is highly user-friendly, which makes both navigation and test execution simple and efficient. Integration with frameworks such as Selenium and Appium is smooth, significantly cutting down on setup time. The customer support team is responsive and knowledgeable, consistently resolving any issues quickly. We use BrowserStack every day for regression and compatibility testing across a wide range of devices and operating system versions. Features like Live Testing, Automate, and App Live provide the flexibility needed for both manual and automated testing. The debugging tools, including logs, screenshots, and video recordings, are especially useful. Integration with CI/CD tools like Jenkins and GitHub Actions works seamlessly, allowing us to automate our processes at scale without hassle. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The pricing can be somewhat steep for small teams or startups, particularly as you increase the number of parallel sessions. Occasionally, tests may encounter some latency, especially when running several sessions at once. Additionally, popular devices or operating system versions are not always instantly accessible during peak times. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I really like that BrowserStack provides instant access to real devices with various OS and browser versions, which makes cross-browser testing easy. We don't need to set up any virtual machines, saving us cost, time, and effort. It's fantastic that we can do both live and automation tests in the same place using BrowserStack. Access is instant through the cloud, and we can quickly replicate the desired OS and browser to test and share results. The BrowserStack dashboard is user-friendly and doesn't require any specific training. It ensures backward compatibility and helps validate UX consistency. Plus, BrowserStack doesn't require any hardware setup, and it works from any machine since it's cloud-based, so the initial setup didn't take more than 15 minutes. In the current market, BrowserStack outstands in performance and features, and I would recommend it on a scale of 10. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

BrowserStack has performance issues. Since we access the device/OS/browsers from the cloud, we find latency very often, and UI elements are not quickly clickable or accessible. Even logging into the application takes a delay most of the time. BrowserStack local tunneling is tricky for new users. A frequent issue faced was lag in screen updates after triggering actions. Also, sometimes button clicks and their response take delay. Form input sometimes registers keystrokes slowly. Automated test suites with more than 70+ test cases take more time to complete execution. Slower test execution due to extra network hops. Need a single command setup that handles firewall conflicts. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What Works Really Well:

1. The idle warning system is brilliant - Before my session times out, I get a clear warning with a countdown timer. That ticking clock sound effect genuinely creates urgency and has saved me from losing sessions multiple times. It's both functional and effective!

2. Extensive real device coverage - The range of actual devices available is impressive. Being able to test on real hardware rather than just emulators catches issues that simulators miss, especially around touch gestures, performance, and device-specific bugs.

3. App installation flexibility - Multiple options to install apps (via Play Store, upload APK, or URL) makes testing different build versions straightforward and accommodates various workflow needs.

4. Session recording and debugging tools - The built-in video recording are essential for bug documentation. I can capture exactly what happened during a defect scenario. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

The Challenging Parts:

1. Google Play Store login flow has a recurring glitch - When testing apps that require Google sign-in through the Play Store, the session often resets during authentication. I'll be in the middle of logging in, and suddenly I'm back at an empty email field, forcing me to re-enter my credentials. This disrupts my testing flow significantly.

2. 10-minute idle timeout feels too restrictive - The maximum idle limit kicks in after just 10 minutes. As a QA professional reviewing test cases, taking screenshots, or documenting bugs, I often need more buffer time. I'm not sure if this varies by plan, but a 15-20 minute window would be more practical.

3. Unexpected session terminations - Sessions occasionally disconnect without warning, possibly due to internet connectivity issues on either end. When this happens, I lose my testing progress and have to restart the entire setup.

4. Limited concurrent sessions - I can't run multiple App Live sessions across different browsers simultaneously, which would really speed up my cross-device testing. Not sure if higher-tier plans offer this, but it would be a game-changer.

5. Initial device loading time - Some devices take 2-3 minutes to initialize, which adds up when you're testing across multiple configurations in a day. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. The ability to jump into any device or browser in seconds is honestly the biggest advantage. I don’t wait for emulators to boot or hunt for physical devices.

2. Touch response and scroll behaviour feel close enough to a real phone to reliably catch UI alignment, gesture issues, and responsive bugs.

3. Built-in tools like network throttling, geolocation, and device rotation make it easier to recreate real-world scenarios without using third-party utilities.

4. Screenshots and video recordings save time when creating bug reports, I can attach evidence instantly.

5. The consistency matters most. Whether it’s Chrome on a Pixel or Safari on an iPhone, I know exactly what environment I’m testing in. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

1. The visual frame rate occasionally drops for animation-heavy flows, making certain UI issues slightly harder to observe.

2. Switching between device orientations isn’t always instant, there’s a small lag. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I like best about BrowserStack is the ability to reliably test automation across a wide range of real browsers and real mobile devices without the overhead of maintaining local infrastructure. It allows me to quickly validate web and mobile applications in parallel across environments, which significantly speeds up feedback loops. The seamless integration with automation frameworks, stable cloud infrastructure, and accurate reproduction of real-world user conditions make it especially valuable for building and maintaining scalable test automation suites. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I dislike about BrowserStack is that test execution can occasionally be slower or inconsistent, especially during peak usage times, which can impact automation stability. Debugging failed tests can also be challenging at times due to limited visibility into device-level logs or transient environment issues. Additionally, managing sessions and optimizing parallel usage sometimes requires extra tuning to keep costs and execution time under control. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Parallel execution actually works reliably. When we run our full suite across multiple OS-browser combinations, the time savings are huge. The integration with popular frameworks (Selenium, Appium, Playwright, Cypress) is straightforward, you don’t waste time wrestling with configs. The session dashboard is clean: logs, video, network timelines, console output - all in one place. Debugging flakiness becomes much easier. Being able to run tests on real mobile + desktop devices without maintaining hardware is a massive operational relief. Build insights (pass/fail trends, flaky test detection, failure clustering) help identify problem tests faster. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

Occasional device allocation delays during peak hours can slow down CI pipelines. Video playback during debugging sometimes feels slightly laggy for animation-heavy flows. Network logs are useful but could be more detailed for deep investigation. If the suite has many retries, the dashboard can get cluttered without proper naming conventions. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like that BrowserStack provides instant access to a wide range of real devices and browsers, eliminating the need to maintain an internal device lab. The platform is extremely reliable, integrates well with existing CI/CD tools, and offers fast, accurate results. Its combination of live testing, automated testing, and debugging tools helps streamline the entire QA workflow. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

My main dislike is the latency when interacting with real devices, which can slow down debugging. Some features feel scattered, and advanced automation capabilities often require higher-tier plans. Device availability during high-traffic times can also be a challenge. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

I like BrowserStack because it’s reliable and close to real-world usage.

You get real browsers and devices without setup pain, issues show up like they do in production, and debugging is easier with built-in logs, screenshots, and videos. It saves time and removes guesswork. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

What I dislike is the occasional flakiness and slowness, especially during peak hours.

Sometimes sessions lag, browsers disconnect, or tests fail for infra reasons rather than real bugs—which can be frustrating when you’re chasing false negatives. It’s great overall, but not always as fast or stable as you’d want for heavy parallel automation. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

At our company, we use it as Agent AI, for test management, and for App Live to support mobile automation. We rely on it often, and it is straightforward to implement. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.

During our testing of the Generate AI feature, we noticed that it lacks an option to continue the chat and further refine the conversation. Review collected by and hosted on G2.com.