Alternatives to Ghost Inspector logo

Alternatives to Ghost Inspector

BrowserStack, Selenium, Cypress, Mocha, and Jest are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Ghost Inspector.
51
73
+ 1
22

What is Ghost Inspector and what are its top alternatives?

It lets you create and manage UI tests that check specific functionality in your website or application. We execute these automated browser tests continuously from the cloud and alert you if anything breaks.
Ghost Inspector is a tool in the In-Browser Testing category of a tech stack.
Ghost Inspector is an open source tool with GitHub stars and GitHub forks. Here鈥檚 a link to Ghost Inspector's open source repository on GitHub

Top Alternatives to Ghost Inspector

  • BrowserStack

    BrowserStack

    Live, Web-Based Browser Testing Instant access to all real mobile and desktop browsers. Say goodbye to your lab of devices and virtual machines. ...

  • Selenium

    Selenium

    Selenium automates browsers. That's it! What you do with that power is entirely up to you. Primarily, it is for automating web applications for testing purposes, but is certainly not limited to just that. Boring web-based administration tasks can (and should!) also be automated as well. ...

  • Cypress

    Cypress

    Cypress is a front end automated testing application created for the modern web. Cypress is built on a new architecture and runs in the same run-loop as the application being tested. As a result Cypress provides better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser. Cypress works on any front-end framework or website. ...

  • Mocha

    Mocha

    Mocha is a feature-rich JavaScript test framework running on node.js and the browser, making asynchronous testing simple and fun. Mocha tests run serially, allowing for flexible and accurate reporting, while mapping uncaught exceptions to the correct test cases. ...

  • Jest

    Jest

    Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.

  • Zapier

    Zapier

    Zapier is for busy people who know their time is better spent selling, marketing, or coding. Instead of wasting valuable time coming up with complicated systems - you can use Zapier to automate the web services you and your team are already using on a daily basis. ...

  • Jasmine

    Jasmine

    Jasmine is a Behavior Driven Development testing framework for JavaScript. It does not rely on browsers, DOM, or any JavaScript framework. Thus it's suited for websites, Node.js projects, or anywhere that JavaScript can run. ...

  • Chai

    Chai

    It is a BDD / TDD assertion library for node and the browser that can be delightfully paired with any javascript testing framework. It has several interfaces that allow the developer to choose the most comfortable. The chain-capable BDD styles provide an expressive language & readable style, while the TDD assert style provides a more classical feel. ...

Ghost Inspector alternatives & related posts

BrowserStack logo

BrowserStack

2.5K
1.8K
423
Instant access to a lab of 2000+ real mobile and desktop browsers for testing.
2.5K
1.8K
+ 1
423
PROS OF BROWSERSTACK
  • 127
    Multiple browsers
  • 69
    Ease of use
  • 58
    Real browsers
  • 40
    Ability to use it locally
  • 22
    Good price
  • 17
    Great web interface
  • 15
    IE support
  • 13
    Official mobile emulators
  • 12
    Cloud-based access
  • 11
    Instant access
  • 6
    Real mobile devices
  • 5
    Multiple Desktop OS
  • 4
    Can be used for Testing and E2E
  • 4
    Selenium compatible
  • 4
    Screenshots
  • 3
    Video of test runs
  • 3
    Pre-installed developer tools
  • 2
    Many browsers
  • 2
    Webdriver compatible
  • 2
    Favourites
  • 2
    Supports Manual, Functional and Visual Diff Testing
  • 1
    Free for Open Source
  • 1
    Cypress Compatible
CONS OF BROWSERSTACK
  • 1
    Very limited choice of minor versions

related BrowserStack posts

Zarema Khalilova
Frontend Team Lead at Uploadcare | 6 upvotes 路 166.1K views

I am working on #OpenSource file uploader. The uploader is the widget that other developers embed in their apps. It should work well in different browsers and on different devices. BrowserStack and Sauce Labs help to achieve that. I can test the uploader in many varieties of browsers+OS only used my browser without virtual machines.

See more
Selenium logo

Selenium

9.2K
6.8K
508
Web Browser Automation
9.2K
6.8K
+ 1
508
PROS OF SELENIUM
  • 165
    Automates browsers
  • 152
    Testing
  • 100
    Essential tool for running test automation
  • 24
    Record-Playback
  • 24
    Remote Control
  • 7
    Supports end to end testing
  • 7
    Data crawling
  • 6
    Functional testing
  • 5
    Easy set up
  • 3
    End to End Testing
  • 3
    Easy to integrate with build tools
  • 2
    Record and playback
  • 2
    Easy to scale
  • 2
    Compatible with Python
  • 2
    The Most flexible monitoring system
  • 2
    Integration Tests
  • 2
    Comparing the performance selenium is faster than jasm
  • 0
    Integrated into Selenium-Jupiter framework
CONS OF SELENIUM
  • 3
    Flaky tests
  • 1
    Slow as needs to make browser (even with no gui)

related Selenium posts

Kamil Kowalski
Lead Architect at Fresha | 27 upvotes 路 814.3K views

When you think about test automation, it鈥檚 crucial to make it everyone鈥檚 responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

See more
Benjamin Poon
QA Manager - Engineering at HBC Digital | 8 upvotes 路 620.4K views

For our digital QA organization to support a complex hybrid monolith/microservice architecture, our team took on the lofty goal of building out a commonized UI test automation framework. One of the primary requisites included a technical minimalist threshold such that an engineer or analyst with fundamental knowledge of JavaScript could automate their tests with greater ease. Just to list a few: - Nightwatchjs - Selenium - Cucumber - GitHub - Go.CD - Docker - ExpressJS - React - PostgreSQL

With this structure, we're able to combine the automation efforts of each team member into a centralized repository while also providing new relevant metrics to business owners.

See more
Cypress logo

Cypress

1K
1.1K
85
Better, faster, and more reliable testing for anything that runs in a browser.
1K
1.1K
+ 1
85
PROS OF CYPRESS
  • 21
    Open source
  • 16
    Great documentation
  • 14
    Fast
  • 14
    Simple usage
  • 8
    Easy us with CI
  • 8
    Cross Browser testing
  • 4
    Npm install cypress only
CONS OF CYPRESS
  • 13
    Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing
  • 9
    Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support
  • 7
    No file upload support
  • 7
    No iFrame support
  • 7
    No page object support
  • 7
    No xPath support
  • 7
    No multiple domain support
  • 6
    No support for multiple tab control
  • 6
    Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet
  • 6
    Cypress doesn't support native app
  • 5
    No support for Safari
  • 5
    No support for multiple browser control
  • 3
    Adobe
  • 3
    Not freeware
  • 3
    $20/user/thread for reports
  • 2
    No 'WD wire protocol' support
  • 2
    Using a non-standard automation protocol

related Cypress posts

Kamil Kowalski
Lead Architect at Fresha | 27 upvotes 路 814.3K views

When you think about test automation, it鈥檚 crucial to make it everyone鈥檚 responsibility (not just QA Engineers'). We started with Selenium and Java, but with our platform revolving around Ruby, Elixir and JavaScript, QA Engineers were left alone to automate tests. Cypress was the answer, as we could switch to JS and simply involve more people from day one. There's a downside too, as it meant testing on Chrome only, but that was "good enough" for us + if really needed we can always cover some specific cases in a different way.

See more
Robert Zuber

We are in the process of adopting Next.js as our React framework and using Storybook to help build our React components in isolation. This new part of our frontend is written in TypeScript, and we use Emotion for CSS/styling. For delivering data, we use GraphQL and Apollo. Jest, Percy, and Cypress are used for testing.

See more
Mocha logo

Mocha

3.4K
2.5K
417
Simple, flexible, fun javascript test framework for node.js & the browser
3.4K
2.5K
+ 1
417
PROS OF MOCHA
  • 134
    Open source
  • 100
    Simple
  • 81
    Promise support
  • 47
    Flexible
  • 28
    Easy to add support for Generators
  • 11
    For browser and server testing
  • 6
    Curstom assertion libraries
  • 3
    No other better tools
  • 2
    Works with Karma
  • 1
    Works with BrowserStack
  • 1
    Simple integration testing
  • 1
    Simple setup
  • 1
    Works with saucelabs
  • 1
    Lots of tutorials and help online
CONS OF MOCHA
  • 3
    Cannot test a promisified functions without assertion
  • 1
    No assertion count in results

related Mocha posts

I use both mocha and Jest because:

  • I don't care whether teams use Jest or Mocha. But jest is way too overhyped. Most devs are writing integration tests and think that it's so much better but frankly I don't write integration tests as the way to get both design feedback and confidence when I code. I adhere to the test pyramid, not ice cream cone or the dumb "trophy"

  • I TDD, so I only ever use the "API" of test frameworks. I don't do a lot of integration tests for TDD and all the bells and whistles Jest provides you from the command-line I just don't need. And I certainly do not care about or touch Jest Snapshots, I despise them

  • My tests are fast enough because I write isolated tests with TDD, so I don't run into performance issues. Example: I write my tests in a way that I can run 300 tests in literally 1 second with mocha. So the Jest ability to pinpoint and only run those tests which are affected by code changes. I want to run all of them every time when I TDD. It's a different mindset when you TDD

  • I also mainly code in IntelliJ or WebStorm because I feel the tools in that IDE far surpass VSCode and I also love running the test UI runner in it vs. lousy command-line

  • I feel both mocha and Jest read just fine in terms of code readability. Jest might have shorter assertion syntax but I don't really care. I just care that I can read the damn test and my tests are written well and my test descriptions, as well as the code itself including constants represent business language, not technical. I care most about BDD, clean code, 4 rules of simple design, and SOLID

  • I don't like using mock frameworks so no I don't use Jest's Mocking framework. I don't have to mock a lot in my tests due to the nature of how I strive to code...I keep my design simple and modular using principals such as clean code and 4 rules of simple design. If I must mock, I create very simple custom mocks with JS

  • On the contrary to the belief that integration tests and mount are the way to go (this belief drives me absolutely crazy, especially Dodd's promoting that), I TDD with shallow & enzyme. My tests are simple. My design is driven by my tests and my tests give me quick and useful feedback. I have a course I'm working on coming out soon on TDD with React to show you how to truly test the FE and why the ice cream cone and trophy suck (you're being scammed people). Watch for that here: https://twitter.com/DaveSchinkel/status/1062267649235791873

Don't forget to upvote this post!

Mocha Jest JavaScript React @jsdom Enzyme #tdd #bdd #testdrivendevelopment

See more
Jack Graves
Head of Product Development at Automation Consultants | 3 upvotes 路 100.2K views

We use JUnit and Jest to perform the bulk of our automated test scenarios, with additional work with Apache JMeter for performance testing - for example, the Atlassian Data Center compliance testing is performed with JMeter. Jest provides testing for the React interfaces, which make up the backend of our App offerings. JUnit is used for Unit Testing our Server-based Apps. Mocha is another tool we use.

See more
Jest logo

Jest

3.2K
2.2K
158
Painless JavaScript Unit Testing
3.2K
2.2K
+ 1
158
PROS OF JEST
  • 33
    Open source
  • 29
    Mock by default makes testing much simpler
  • 21
    Testing React Native Apps
  • 18
    Parallel test running
  • 14
    Fast
  • 12
    Bundled with JSDOM to enable DOM testing
  • 7
    Mock by default screws up your classes, breaking tests
  • 7
    Out of the box code coverage
  • 6
    Promise support
  • 6
    One stop shop for unit testing
  • 3
    Great documentation
  • 1
    Assert Library Included
  • 1
    Built in watch option with interactive filtering menu
  • 0
    Can be used for BDD
CONS OF JEST
  • 2
    Many bugs still not fixed months/years after reporting
  • 2
    Multiple error messages for same error
  • 1
    Bugged
  • 1
    Unstable
  • 1
    Bad docs
  • 1
    Ambiguous
  • 1
    Difficult
  • 1
    Still does't support .mjs files natively
  • 1
    Can't fail beforeAll to abort tests
  • 1
    Difficult to run single test/describe/file
  • 1
    Documentation
  • 1
    Ambiguous configuration
  • 0
    Interaction with watch mode on terminal
  • 0
    BeforeAll timing out makes all passing tests fail

related Jest posts

Robert Zuber

We are in the process of adopting Next.js as our React framework and using Storybook to help build our React components in isolation. This new part of our frontend is written in TypeScript, and we use Emotion for CSS/styling. For delivering data, we use GraphQL and Apollo. Jest, Percy, and Cypress are used for testing.

See more
Shared insights
on
CypressCypressJestJest

As we all know testing is an important part of any application. To assist with our testing we are going to use both Cypress and Jest. We feel these tools complement each other and will help us get good coverage of our code. We will use Cypress for our end to end testing as we've found it quite user friendly. Jest will be used for our unit tests because we've seen how many larger companies use it with great success.

See more
Zapier logo

Zapier

1.2K
825
113
Automate tasks between other online services (services like Salesforce, Basecamp, Gmail, and 400+ more)
1.2K
825
+ 1
113
PROS OF ZAPIER
  • 45
    Sync cloud services
  • 33
    Easy setup
  • 15
    Scheduled tasks
  • 8
    Great customer support
  • 6
    Integrates with Trello
  • 6
    Gives me updates anytime, anywhere
CONS OF ZAPIER
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Zapier posts

    Julien DeFrance
    Principal Software Engineer at Tophatter | 16 upvotes 路 2.2M views

    Back in 2014, I was given an opportunity to re-architect SmartZip Analytics platform, and flagship product: SmartTargeting. This is a SaaS software helping real estate professionals keeping up with their prospects and leads in a given neighborhood/territory, finding out (thanks to predictive analytics) who's the most likely to list/sell their home, and running cross-channel marketing automation against them: direct mail, online ads, email... The company also does provide Data APIs to Enterprise customers.

    I had inherited years and years of technical debt and I knew things had to change radically. The first enabler to this was to make use of the cloud and go with AWS, so we would stop re-inventing the wheel, and build around managed/scalable services.

    For the SaaS product, we kept on working with Rails as this was what my team had the most knowledge in. We've however broken up the monolith and decoupled the front-end application from the backend thanks to the use of Rails API so we'd get independently scalable micro-services from now on.

    Our various applications could now be deployed using AWS Elastic Beanstalk so we wouldn't waste any more efforts writing time-consuming Capistrano deployment scripts for instance. Combined with Docker so our application would run within its own container, independently from the underlying host configuration.

    Storage-wise, we went with Amazon S3 and ditched any pre-existing local or network storage people used to deal with in our legacy systems. On the database side: Amazon RDS / MySQL initially. Ultimately migrated to Amazon RDS for Aurora / MySQL when it got released. Once again, here you need a managed service your cloud provider handles for you.

    Future improvements / technology decisions included:

    Caching: Amazon ElastiCache / Memcached CDN: Amazon CloudFront Systems Integration: Segment / Zapier Data-warehousing: Amazon Redshift BI: Amazon Quicksight / Superset Search: Elasticsearch / Amazon Elasticsearch Service / Algolia Monitoring: New Relic

    As our usage grows, patterns changed, and/or our business needs evolved, my role as Engineering Manager then Director of Engineering was also to ensure my team kept on learning and innovating, while delivering on business value.

    One of these innovations was to get ourselves into Serverless : Adopting AWS Lambda was a big step forward. At the time, only available for Node.js (Not Ruby ) but a great way to handle cost efficiency, unpredictable traffic, sudden bursts of traffic... Ultimately you want the whole chain of services involved in a call to be serverless, and that's when we've started leveraging Amazon DynamoDB on these projects so they'd be fully scalable.

    See more

    I would like to build a community-based customer review platform for a niche industry where users can sign up for a forum, as well as post detailed reviews of their experience with a company/product, including a rating system for pre-selected features. Something like niche.com or areavibes.com with curated information/data, ratings, reviews, and comparison functionalities.

    Is this possible to build using no-code tools? I have read about the possibility of using Webflow with Memberstack, Airtable, and Elfsight through Zapier / Integromat, which may allow for good design and functionality. Is it possible with Bubble or Bildr?

    I have no problems with a bit of a learning curve as long as what I want is possible. Since I have 0 coding experience, I am not sure how to go about it.

    Any advice would be greatly appreciated!

    See more
    Jasmine logo

    Jasmine

    1K
    1.2K
    181
    DOM-less simple JavaScript testing framework
    1K
    1.2K
    + 1
    181
    PROS OF JASMINE
    • 61
      Can also be used for tdd
    • 48
      Open source
    • 17
      Originally from RSpec
    • 15
      Great community
    • 14
      No dependencies, not even DOM
    • 10
      Easy to setup
    • 8
      Simple
    • 3
      Created by Pivotal-Labs
    • 2
      Works with KarmaJs
    • 1
      Async and promises are easy calls with "done"
    • 1
      Jasmine is faster than selenium in angular application
    • 1
      SpyOn to fake calls
    CONS OF JASMINE
    • 2
      Unfriendly error logs

    related Jasmine posts

    Joshua Dean K眉pper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschr盲nkt) | 6 upvotes 路 51.5K views

    For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

    See more

    Switched from Jasmine with Karma that come setup by Angular CLI to use Jest instead, since Jasmine and Karma were very finicky in my setup and had to be reconfigured frequently to run tests properly.

    Jest was also easier to integrate into my workflow with Visual Studio Code.

    See more
    Chai logo

    Chai

    693
    126
    0
    A BDD / TDD assertion library
    693
    126
    + 1
    0
    PROS OF CHAI
      Be the first to leave a pro
      CONS OF CHAI
        Be the first to leave a con

        related Chai posts

        Joshua Dean K眉pper
        CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschr盲nkt) | 6 upvotes 路 51.5K views

        For our internal team and collaboration panel we use Nuxt.js (with TypeScript that is transpiled into ES6), Webpack and npm. We enjoy the opinionated nature of Nuxt.js over vanilla Vue.js, as we would end up using all of the components Nuxt.js incorporates anyways and we can adhere to the conventions setup by the Nuxt.js project, which allows us to get better support in case we run into any dead ends. Webpack allows us to create reproducable builds and also debug our application with hot reloads, which greately increased the pace at which we are able to perform and test changes. We also incorporated a lot of testing (ESLint, Chai, Jasmine, Nightwatchjs) into our pipelines and can trigger those jobs through GitLab CI. All packages are fetched through npm, so that we can keep our git repositories slim and are notified of new updates aswell as reported security flaws.

        See more

        React LoopBack Node.js ExpressJS Elasticsearch Kibana Logstash Sequelize Mocha Chai Visual Studio Code are the combo of technologies being used by me to build BestPrice Extension with all its micro-services & Web-based fragments

        See more