In Agile methods testing is a continuous procedure that starts from the start of the development process. Testing can now be performed either by hand or through automation. Let's explore the manual testing vs automated testing issue. Learn the advantages of testing using automation over manual testing, and the reverse, and also receive advice on how you should use which method of testing.
What is the Difference Between Manual Testing and Automated Testing?
Manual testing services are conducted directly by an assurance of quality (QA) expert who uses software to run scenarios that are based around the requirements. QAs test one scenario at a time.
In automated testing the test scenarios are run through software, which usually allows for different scenarios to be evaluated simultaneously. But, in order for automated testing to function the test scenarios have been designed with the help of an automation quality control expert and therefore, automated testing services requires human involvement. To allow automated testing, QA develops scripts in the software of their preference typically Python, C#, or Java. The scripts are then run by using tools like TestComplete, Selenium, or Appium. Software is faster at running tests than humans, however it requires humans to perform the work.
Additionally, it is true that not all tests can be performed using software.
Benefits of Automated Testing
Why do we try to automatize everything in the first initial place? It (a) allows us to enjoy more and more important tasks and (b) helps us achieve our goals more quickly. This is true for software development, too. But, there's more to automated testing in software.
-
Automatization Saves Time on Lengthy Tasks
Testing software can take a significant amount of time and can be repetitive, for instance the process of determining whether an application is operating in the manner it's supposed to following updates to either the application itself or to the operating system. It's true that both iOS as well as Android mobile applications are frequently updated, and in some cases, these updates impact features within apps. If an update has an impact on the features that your application uses, you must check those features to be sure that your application is compatible using the most current version of the operating system.
The repetitive tasks mentioned above can be performed manually, however, they consume a lot time from testing teams. Instead the QA can develop algorithms that automate these tests while the QA is testing new features. The scripts can perform tests 5 times more quickly than an individual and the QA can complete the tasks that aren't automated, or write additional scripts while at the same time.
Furthermore, automated tests are able to run continuously, while software testing professionals typically have a standard eight-hour workday every day of the week.
Examples Regression tests are run following each update to a feature, app or an operating system. The tests determine whether the update causes the possibility of a conflict or bug between the two features. It can take a long time for QA to run manually these tests, and run them again following every update.
A QA automation specialist could create a test script and test it at the number of times that are needed. While these tests are running your QAs for automation and manual may be testing other functions.
-
Automation Can be a Weapon to Combat Human Errors
People make mistakes and overlook things. Machines, when properly programmed aren't prone to errors. When there's a lapse in test code or execution, you'll be able to identify it because the test will fail. When testing with automated technology, there's no "it appears to be working exactly as you would expect" -it's either working or does not.
For instance, due to insufficient expertise or time Manual QAs may miss tiny signs of bugs in the features. These bugs could cause catastrophic failures Fixing them at later stages of mobile app development can take more time (and cost) than fixing them earlier.
This isn't possible when computers run tests since computers (a) can run tests faster than humans, and (b) do not get bored, exhausted or too accustomed to the program.
-
Automation Can Save You Money (if used correctly)
It's a simple concept When a quality assurance (QA) has less time to complete an assignment, it will cost less. In discussions about manual or automation, this issue frequently comes up. This is accurate to a certain extent. In the longer term, automating the tasks that can be automated will likely save you lots of QA time and consequently, lots of cash.
But there's a flip aspect to this coin, because automated testing software is expensive money too. Because of this, testing automation is usually employed on large projects, not short-term ones which have little benefit from it.
-
Certain Tests Are Only Conducted Using Automated Testing
In the case of testing large applications that are designed to be used by a lot of people at the at the same time -- streaming software or video conferencing or online educational tools or games that are popular testing them manually for performance under pressure is virtually impossible. Tests to determine whether an application is able to handle hundreds of users at once without crashing will require hundreds of test subjects. This doesn't appear to be a feasible or economically viable option do you think?
But, a script is able to simulate such loads easily. Automated testing is necessary for stress, load, and tests of performance. But they're not required for every app you create. You'll have to decide if you want to conduct them for each app separately.
Drawbacks of Automation Testing
Let's move on to the pros.
-
More Complicated
They don't write themselves. QAs create manual scripts for each job which means that an QA automation engineer must have expertise in programming and at minimum the one language used for programming (the most used tests that are automated include Python, Java, and C#). For automated testing the QA creates a test case to run a script. Each scenario is written by hand, which is time-consuming for an QA.
However, when it comes to repetitive tasks or tasks which can be automated over the long term it is a better choice.
-
Automated Tests aren't the Solution to all Problems.
There are some things that automated tests cannot accomplish with the current technology. For instance, they cannot substitute manual tests when concerns testing user-friendliness or design. These things require human insight. However, tests for the app's design and its user-friendliness can't be performed by QAs, either. User feedback is often gathered through a test group of users as well as from employees of the company. The test group could or might not be compensated.
Another instance in which automated software testing services is not sufficient is testing new features. In order for an QA expert to understand how to write a test program they must be aware of what they can expect from their tests.
A majority of software tests are automated. However, not all. There are instances that test by hand is the most preferred method. Let's look at benefits of using manual tests over automatic.
Benefits of Manual Testing
The reality of the modern day software development services is that the majority of tests are still conducted manual. The reasons for this vary between different companies. We'll discuss a few of them below.
-
Manual Testing is Simpler to Implement
It's quite simple to provide your company with competent Manual QA specialists, in contrast to automation experts. A lot of manual testing tasks are possible with only access to code or prior knowledge of programming. This is the reason testing is thought of as the first step into software development. You could start with just a basic knowledge and build expertise as you go. There are more quality manual QAs available than are specialists in automation.
Testing by hand is the best option for tasks that are extremely difficult to perform.
If you are testing features that are complex, there is a time for running test manually and also the expense for doing this may be lower than the time and cost required to create automated scripts. Additionally, these types of jobs are generally performed only once due to the specifics. Automation is costly.
But, this will be contingent on the QA's abilities in the sense that a highly skilled automation expert can develop complex scenarios more quickly and more precisely than the QA's who are junior. Also, you'll need to consider the value of every automation script.
-
Manual testing is Better for Specific Tasks
User experience, interface design and usability cannot be tested using scripts. Tests require feedback from humans -- often from quality assurance professionals or the test set of customers.
Another situation is when greater focus is required on certain aspects of the test. Writing the script for tests is difficult and often less reliable than working with experts who know what to find.
Sometimes, QAs may also conduct tests in a spontaneous, unusual manner, without planning. This is known as ad-hoc testing. Ad-hoc testing can assist you to discover flaws that are not obvious. In these tests the writing of scripts isn't possible because you do not know the outcomes you're hoping for. In addition, these scripts will most likely be only used once.
The Drawbacks of Manual Testing
This is why automated testing is increasingly preferred over manual testing.
-
Manual Testing is Slower Inherently
The same task that would take a person QA weeks or days could be completed in a matter of minutes or seconds for the machine. Computerized systems and scripts process data much faster than a human. Manual testing can be tiring and takes a lot of time, particularly with repetitive tasks. Test automation that is properly prepared is quick and easy.
-
Manual Testing Can Lead to Mistakes
It is easy to miss important particulars when it comes to the same tasks repeated over and over again, such as re-testing the feature after every update.
The inability to distribute attention across multiple areas at the same time could be a problem for QAs, which makes tests less trustworthy. With complicated features, you'll have to choose between manual or automated testing on an individual basis. Sometimes, automated testing can be excessively expensive and time-consuming due the complex nature of the scripts, particularly when tests are only performed only once. In the long term the long run, using only manual testing may cost more.
In the case of automated testing, companies have to put aside a significant amount from the beginning on both software as well as hiring skilled employees (automation testing is more expensive than manual experts).
But, based on the type and the number of tests needed to be completed, testing manual could be costly. If a project is large and tests require a considerable amount of time to complete, or are repeated repeatedly and the costs increase. This is a problem that should be discussed in the initial phase of planning the project to assess the costs of both options and figure out which is the most cost-effective. The most common approach is to mix the manual and automated testing.
Manual Testing VS Automation Testing
Automation Testing
- Definition
- Automation Testing employs automation tools to run tests.
- Processing time
- Automated testing is considerably more efficient than manual methods.
- Exploratory Testing
- Automation doesn't allow testing at random
- Initial investment
- The initial cost of automated testing is more expensive. However, the ROI is higher over the long term.
- Reliability
- Testing automated is a secure method because it is carried out by scripts and tools. There isn't any test fatigue.
- UI Change
- Even the smallest modification to the user interface of the AUT the automated Test Scripts need to be altered to function as they are expected to work.
- Investment
- The need for investment is essential to test equipment as well as for automation engineers
- Cost-effective
- Cost prohibitive for regressions with low volumes.
- Visibility of Test Reports
- Through automation testing, everyone can sign in to the automation system and review the test results.
- Human observation
- Automated testing is not based on any human involvement. It cannot therefore provide an assurance of user friendliness and a satisfaction for customers.
Manual Testing
- Definition
- When testing by hand the test scenarios are run by a tester who is human and software.
- Processing Time
- When testing by hand the test scenarios are run by a tester who is human and software.
- Exploratory Testing
- Experimentation is possible in Manual Testing
- Initial investment
- The initial investment for manual testing is significantly less. ROI is lower than automation testing over the long haul.
- Reliability
- Manual testing isn't as reliable due to the possibility of human error.
- UI Change
- Minor changes such as a changing the ID or class. of a button shouldn't stop the operation of a manual tester.
- Investment
- The need for investment is essential to human resources.
- Cost-effective
- Cost-effective for large-scale regression.
- Visibility of Test Reports
- Manual Tests are typically documented in Excel or Word and the test results aren't readily or immediately available.
- Human Observation
- Manual testing methods allow people to observe, which could help in providing users with a user-friendly system.
Want to Know More About Our Services? Talk to Our Consultant!
The Key Takeaway
When comparing the results of manual and automated tests, we aren't able to be certain that automated testing is superior or not. manual testing. Software testing is a nebulous and varied procedure. Based on the test being conducted and at what stage and with what purpose the tests are conducted. Naturally, this influences the decision between automated or manual testing. Certain tests are better being automated, while others must be done by hand.
The most effective way for software development company to improve its abilities is to integrate experts in automated and manual testing and divide the tasks of testing among them in a wise way, and create the most effective use of both. Every project can incorporate tests that are automated as well as manual in varying proportions. It is recommended to develop a testing strategy right from the beginning.
