boundaries. In my knowledge, to a greater extent than defects are unearthed using out of the box exploratory testing approach than running automation scripts. Automation tests tin exclusively notice yous bugs for which they were written. They can’t notice yous whatsoever NEW bug. If yous desire to notice novel bugs, as well as therefore yous demand to either notice those yourself manually (that’s right, yesteryear a human tester), or write NEW automation scripts to notice them.
4. H5N1 human tester needsno less spoon-feeding equally compared to a tool. Computers are dumb, as well as therefore are automation tools. You alter a variable/object refer inward a employment of code of your AUT (Application Under Test) as well as the tool would struggle to figure out where it has gone! More over tools demand step-by-step instructions to perform a specific testing task. They (tools) are wretched at agreement natural human language. Imagine quest a human tester to examine a “User Help Manual”. What if nosotros are to automate this test? Can a tool examine a human readable assist manual efficiently? In case, yous travel on to know of a agency to automate this process, kindly permit me know. I am inward search of such a tool.
5. Human testers stone when it comes to Usability testing where automation tools neglect miserably. Tools are wretched inward judging what is to a greater extent than usable from a human bespeak of view similar covert alignments, appearance of windows, smoothness of object alignments, coloring combinations, ease of usability, an entertaining user experience etc. After all nosotros prepare software to live used yesteryear human beings, non computers! So who would live a improve candidate to approximate the usability of such an application? You already know the answer.
6. Human beings are expert examples of beingness adaptable. We could adapt to the changing environs as well as survived when large creatures similar earlier post, as well as therefore yous powerfulness already know that I beloved to examine inward agile environs similar TDD as well as equally yous know no agile evolution tin live imagined without examine automation. What I oppose is the thought of automating tests at the GUI score using commercial tools that swallow upward a large chunk of your testing budget. IMHO, this is simply waste product of coin on something that could guide hold been avoided if proper testing (including automation) was done at the unit of measurement level, inward the showtime place. If yous must automate your tests at the GUI level, as well as therefore notice out a agency to prepare as well as utilisation your ain examine driver. This agency yous tin salvage on a lot of testing budget, which could live spent on other areas of testing. e.g In our arrangement nosotros utilisation our ain in-house “GUI Test Driver” to perform automated GUI tests, which uses XML as well as XSLT as well as runs on superlative of Nunit framework. But at whatsoever rate, I am a clear supporter of examine automation if done at the unit of measurement level. And of class at that spot are areas of testing (like stress testing, performance testing, penetration testing, link testing, API testing etc) where the demand of automating your tests becomes an absolute necessity.
Test Automation Pros:
1. Computers piece of work much faster than a human tester as well as are less prone to larn confused spell doing multi-tasking (doing several tasks at the same time, switching betwixt them). Computers never aid to pass fourth dimension on attention a telephone phone telephone or attention a review meeting/presentation, dissimilar a human tester. This tin resultant inward much to a greater extent than productivity equally compared to a human tester, of class nether for certain contexts.
2. Computers are nifty at mathematical calculations. Computer's retentiveness is much to a greater extent than accurate than a human brain, it’s capacity to retrieve stuffs is much to a greater extent than than a human as well as it’s capacity to retrieve information from stored retentiveness is much faster as well as to a greater extent than accurate equally compared to human brain. This accuracy of computation tin live exploited via examine automation, specially inward tests that involve high book of computation work.
3. Computers never skip whatsoever hours of testing. People larn tired, people larn distracted, but computers are nifty at repetitive tasks humans are non real expert at. Computers demand no rest, shows no sign of fatigue, never gets bored amongst repetitive work, tin piece of work on weekends, holidays as well as fifty-fifty nighttime shifts without complaining at all (of class until they encounter a interruption down/malfunctioning). This powerfulness of computers tin live used to our wages via examine automation.
4. Computers never complain virtually salary hikes, reveal of paid leaves, holidays. Nor practise they inquire for alter of projection if it starts to larn wearisome working on the same projection for a long time. Tools lack emotions as well as it tin show to live a expert affair when looked from an employee satisfaction bespeak of view. [Remember, an arrangement spends on a tool. Hence the tool is also similar an employee working for the organization]
5. At for certain contexts, examine automation tin live toll effective than manual testing. Paying for the evolution of a tool as well as a small-scale grouping of testers to run it may live cheaper at contexts, equally compared to maintaining a whole large grouping of testers testing everything manually.
6. When it comes to charge test, plainly automation is an absolute requirement. Gone are the days when yous summoned 100 employees into a large lab, asked each of them to hitting the Enter cardinal at the same fourth dimension as well as hoped that they hitting it precisely at the same bespeak of fourth dimension (millisecond level)! In testing nosotros demand accuracy of actions. And for scenarios similar charge as well as performance testing automation tests tin offering us such precision.
7. Going for examine automation tin live a expert choice for regression testing nightly builds. If yous guide hold a laid of tests that yous demand to examine periodically over a long menses of fourth dimension as well as if yous are confident that piddling or no major alter would live made inward areas covered yesteryear those tests, as well as therefore yous powerfulness opt to automate such tests to salvage yous some precious time.
Having said all this permit me summarize my opinion. Coming to the pith query of “can automation tools always *replace* human testers”, I honestly don’t mean value that it is going to travel on ever. Well, non at to the lowest degree inward side yesteryear side few centuries, non before at that spot are no to a greater extent than software to prepare as well as they are *completely* tested or non before human beings larn therefore lazy that they fifty-fifty halt moving some [watched cricket is all virtually having all-rounders. And IMHO, therefore is modern twenty-four hr menses testing field. I notice it pleasing to discovery myself a born optimist. Though people powerfulness tell that also much of optimism is non expert for testing, I yet believe that optimism silent retains the cardinal to success. Let me endeavour as well as combine the Pros of both class of testers (human as well as computers) as well as consider if nosotros tin convey out their best:
1. Automate tests that involve repetitive, tedious as well as high score of computation work.
2. Let human testers practise tasks that are highly intellectual as well as needs analysis.
3. Use automation for areas that are to the lowest degree prone to alter as well as yet require frequent testing. This agency yous tin salvage some unloosen energy on tests that demand to live tested periodically.
4. As much possible, permit humans practise UI testing.
5. Use automation for areas similar regression, load, link (broken link testing), API testing, showtime score agile (unit) testing.
6. Don’t automate if yous know the UI is going to guide hold a revamp. The slightest changes inward UI tin motion automation to fail. When yous know the UI has been settled down, excluding whatsoever fixes to bugs, that's likely the fourth dimension to automate.
7. Realize as well as sympathise that non all tests can/should live automated. It volition initially accept longer to prepare effective automation scripts than to practise manual testing. Knowing what as well as when to automate is critical.
8. Test automation is a supplement to help/boost the overall testing. Automation tin neither suffice on it’s ain nor it tin supersede other kinds of testing.
I experience that manual as well as automation testing should live allowed to get married to alive happily always afterwards as well as to plow over an offspring of novel hybrid tests. Why non accept wages of both of their Pros as well as practise a win-win province of affairs for us rather than fighting over manual OR automated battle? What practise yous think? Do yous mean value automation tools are going to show weapons of majority devastation for human testers? Do yous mean value tools tin never accept over the house of a human being? Let out your opinions via commenting.
Happy Testing…
More interesting articles here :Tutorial Software Sumber : http://www.softwaretestingtricks.com/
4. H5N1 human tester needs
5. Human testers stone when it comes to Usability testing where automation tools neglect miserably. Tools are wretched inward judging what is to a greater extent than usable from a human bespeak of view similar covert alignments, appearance of windows, smoothness of object alignments, coloring combinations, ease of usability, an entertaining user experience etc. After all nosotros prepare software to live used yesteryear human beings, non computers! So who would live a improve candidate to approximate the usability of such an application? You already know the answer.
6. Human beings are expert examples of beingness adaptable. We could adapt to the changing environs as well as survived when large creatures similar earlier post, as well as therefore yous powerfulness already know that I beloved to examine inward agile environs similar TDD as well as equally yous know no agile evolution tin live imagined without examine automation. What I oppose is the thought of automating tests at the GUI score using commercial tools that swallow upward a large chunk of your testing budget. IMHO, this is simply waste product of coin on something that could guide hold been avoided if proper testing (including automation) was done at the unit of measurement level, inward the showtime place. If yous must automate your tests at the GUI level, as well as therefore notice out a agency to prepare as well as utilisation your ain examine driver. This agency yous tin salvage on a lot of testing budget, which could live spent on other areas of testing. e.g In our arrangement nosotros utilisation our ain in-house “GUI Test Driver” to perform automated GUI tests, which uses XML as well as XSLT as well as runs on superlative of Nunit framework. But at whatsoever rate, I am a clear supporter of examine automation if done at the unit of measurement level. And of class at that spot are areas of testing (like stress testing, performance testing, penetration testing, link testing, API testing etc) where the demand of automating your tests becomes an absolute necessity.
Test Automation Pros:
1. Computers piece of work much faster than a human tester as well as are less prone to larn confused spell doing multi-tasking (doing several tasks at the same time, switching betwixt them). Computers never aid to pass fourth dimension on attention a telephone phone telephone or attention a review meeting/presentation, dissimilar a human tester. This tin resultant inward much to a greater extent than productivity equally compared to a human tester, of class nether for certain contexts.
2. Computers are nifty at mathematical calculations. Computer's retentiveness is much to a greater extent than accurate than a human brain, it’s capacity to retrieve stuffs is much to a greater extent than than a human as well as it’s capacity to retrieve information from stored retentiveness is much faster as well as to a greater extent than accurate equally compared to human brain. This accuracy of computation tin live exploited via examine automation, specially inward tests that involve high book of computation work.
3. Computers never skip whatsoever hours of testing. People larn tired, people larn distracted, but computers are nifty at repetitive tasks humans are non real expert at. Computers demand no rest, shows no sign of fatigue, never gets bored amongst repetitive work, tin piece of work on weekends, holidays as well as fifty-fifty nighttime shifts without complaining at all (of class until they encounter a interruption down/malfunctioning). This powerfulness of computers tin live used to our wages via examine automation.
4. Computers never complain virtually salary hikes, reveal of paid leaves, holidays. Nor practise they inquire for alter of projection if it starts to larn wearisome working on the same projection for a long time. Tools lack emotions as well as it tin show to live a expert affair when looked from an employee satisfaction bespeak of view. [Remember, an arrangement spends on a tool. Hence the tool is also similar an employee working for the organization]
5. At for certain contexts, examine automation tin live toll effective than manual testing. Paying for the evolution of a tool as well as a small-scale grouping of testers to run it may live cheaper at contexts, equally compared to maintaining a whole large grouping of testers testing everything manually.
6. When it comes to charge test, plainly automation is an absolute requirement. Gone are the days when yous summoned 100 employees into a large lab, asked each of them to hitting the Enter cardinal at the same fourth dimension as well as hoped that they hitting it precisely at the same bespeak of fourth dimension (millisecond level)! In testing nosotros demand accuracy of actions. And for scenarios similar charge as well as performance testing automation tests tin offering us such precision.
7. Going for examine automation tin live a expert choice for regression testing nightly builds. If yous guide hold a laid of tests that yous demand to examine periodically over a long menses of fourth dimension as well as if yous are confident that piddling or no major alter would live made inward areas covered yesteryear those tests, as well as therefore yous powerfulness opt to automate such tests to salvage yous some precious time.
Having said all this permit me summarize my opinion. Coming to the pith query of “can automation tools always *replace* human testers”, I honestly don’t mean value that it is going to travel on ever. Well, non at to the lowest degree inward side yesteryear side few centuries, non before at that spot are no to a greater extent than software to prepare as well as they are *completely* tested or non before human beings larn therefore lazy that they fifty-fifty halt moving some [watched cricket is all virtually having all-rounders. And IMHO, therefore is modern twenty-four hr menses testing field. I notice it pleasing to discovery myself a born optimist. Though people powerfulness tell that also much of optimism is non expert for testing, I yet believe that optimism silent retains the cardinal to success. Let me endeavour as well as combine the Pros of both class of testers (human as well as computers) as well as consider if nosotros tin convey out their best:
1. Automate tests that involve repetitive, tedious as well as high score of computation work.
2. Let human testers practise tasks that are highly intellectual as well as needs analysis.
3. Use automation for areas that are to the lowest degree prone to alter as well as yet require frequent testing. This agency yous tin salvage some unloosen energy on tests that demand to live tested periodically.
4. As much possible, permit humans practise UI testing.
5. Use automation for areas similar regression, load, link (broken link testing), API testing, showtime score agile (unit) testing.
6. Don’t automate if yous know the UI is going to guide hold a revamp. The slightest changes inward UI tin motion automation to fail. When yous know the UI has been settled down, excluding whatsoever fixes to bugs, that's likely the fourth dimension to automate.
7. Realize as well as sympathise that non all tests can/should live automated. It volition initially accept longer to prepare effective automation scripts than to practise manual testing. Knowing what as well as when to automate is critical.
8. Test automation is a supplement to help/boost the overall testing. Automation tin neither suffice on it’s ain nor it tin supersede other kinds of testing.
I experience that manual as well as automation testing should live allowed to get married to alive happily always afterwards as well as to plow over an offspring of novel hybrid tests. Why non accept wages of both of their Pros as well as practise a win-win province of affairs for us rather than fighting over manual OR automated battle? What practise yous think? Do yous mean value automation tools are going to show weapons of majority devastation for human testers? Do yous mean value tools tin never accept over the house of a human being? Let out your opinions via commenting.
Happy Testing…