Life is too short for manual testing. Do you agree?
January 31, 2014
We asked. You answered.
You said:
What's your take? Let us know in the comments!
- Sandy Sidhu's blog
- Login or Join to add your comment
You said:
What's your take? Let us know in the comments!
User Comments
Someone's life could be cut short if you try to automate all your testing on a life-critical product.
Automation deals with repetitive activities to bring down the test cycles. It's objective however is not to replace Functional tests. For eg. can you automate Usability tests? The baseline for automation again are manual test scripts. If some of them are wrong, automation will run the wrong steps faster. Exploratory tests are intuitive and manual. Bottomline, automation & manual are complementary to each other not contradictory. Long live Testers (Manual) :-)
This is a most debatable topic and i strongly dont dis-agree. Automation suits only for existing functionality. What about the new test features to test and exploratory testing.
Yes I do agree with that. I believe if there's technology why not we use it and make the work easier. May be I'm wrong also. But that's just my point of views. I personally support automated testing.
Life is never too short for manual testing! everything cannot be automated and whatever can, has to be "automated manually" atleast once.
Although, this could be true if you really believe Wall-E is for real!!!
Check this post here - http://www.softwaretestingclub.com/profiles/blogs/life-is-too-short-for-...
Life is too short, change to automation to make use of new technology & stepping stone to new era
Yep. Definitely. I'm a huge fan of automated testing. If there's a technology, why shouldn't we embrace it, right?
Even I have share an infographic on this, here's the link for it: Infographic Link
Wonderful infographic link....