Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

Cypress

2.4K
2K
+ 1
115
Rainforest QA

39
68
+ 1
53
Add tool

Cypress vs Rainforest QA: What are the differences?

  1. 1. Integration with Development Process: One key difference between Cypress and Rainforest QA is their integration with the development process. Cypress is specifically designed to be integrated seamlessly into the development workflow. It allows developers to write tests directly in the same language as their application code (JavaScript) and run them in the browser alongside their application. On the other hand, Rainforest QA is a cloud-based testing platform that integrates with your existing test automation frameworks and CI/CD pipelines. It provides a platform for creating, executing, and managing test cases, which can be run in parallel across different environments.

  2. 2. Testing Paradigm: Another difference lies in the testing paradigms employed by Cypress and Rainforest QA. Cypress promotes a modern approach to testing called "end-to-end testing". It focuses on simulating real user interactions and verifying the behavior of the entire application from a user's perspective. In contrast, Rainforest QA follows a more traditional approach known as "scripted testing". It involves creating detailed test scripts that outline the steps to be executed and expected results. These scripts are then executed by human testers, ensuring a human touch in the testing process.

  3. 3. Test Automation Capabilities: Cypress and Rainforest QA also differ in their test automation capabilities. Cypress provides a comprehensive set of built-in commands and utilities that allow developers to easily write automated tests for their web applications. It supports features like mocking network requests, stubbing responses, and running tests in parallel. On the other hand, Rainforest QA focuses on providing a scalable and flexible platform for managing and executing manual and automated tests. It offers integrations with popular automation frameworks like Selenium and Appium, allowing you to leverage existing automation code while harnessing Rainforest's benefits.

  4. 4. Execution Environment: When it comes to the execution environment, Cypress executes tests directly in the browser. It runs alongside the application and has deep access to the DOM and network traffic, allowing it to provide real-time feedback and debug information. Rainforest QA, on the other hand, runs tests in a controlled cloud-based environment. It provides a range of browsers and operating systems for testing, ensuring cross-platform compatibility. This allows for easy scalability and parallel execution of tests across multiple environments.

  5. 5. Resource Requirements: Cypress and Rainforest QA also differ in their resource requirements. Cypress requires developers to have a local development environment where they can write and execute tests. It is ideal for development teams that want complete control over their testing infrastructure. Rainforest QA, on the other hand, is a cloud-based service that handles all the infrastructure and resources required for testing. This makes it an attractive option for teams that want to focus more on testing and less on managing infrastructure.

  6. 6. Pricing Model: Finally, the pricing models offered by Cypress and Rainforest QA differ as well. Cypress is an open-source tool, which means it is free to use and doesn't require any licensing fees. It provides additional paid features and premium support through its Cypress Dashboard service. Rainforest QA, on the other hand, operates on a subscription-based pricing model. It offers various pricing tiers based on the number of test runs and testers required.

In Summary, Cypress and Rainforest QA differ in their integration with the development process, testing paradigms, test automation capabilities, execution environments, resource requirements, and pricing models.

Advice on Cypress and Rainforest QA
Yildiz Dila
testmanager/automation tester at medicalservice · | 5 upvotes · 269.7K views
Needs advice
on
CypressCypress
and
ProtractorProtractor

In the company I will be building test automation framework and my new company develops apps mainly using AngularJS/TypeScript. I was planning to build Protractor-Jasmine framework but a friend of mine told me about Cypress and heard that its users are very satisfied with it. I am trying to understand the capabilities of Cypress and as the final goal to differentiate these two tools. Can anyone advice me on this in a nutshell pls...

See more
Replies (2)
Kevin Emery
QE Systems Engineer at Discovery, Inc. · | 4 upvotes · 166.1K views
Recommends
on
CypressCypressProtractorProtractor

I've used both Protractor and Cypress extensively. Cypress is the easier and more reliable tool, whereas Protractor is the more powerful tool. Your choice of tool should depend on your specific testing needs. Here are some advantages and disadvantages of each tool:

Cypress advantages:

  • Faster

  • More reliable (tends to throw fewer intermittent false failures)

  • Easier to read code (handles promises gracefully)

Cypress disadvantages:

  • Cannot switch between browser tabs

  • Cannot switch to iFrames

  • Cannot specify clicks or keypresses explicitly as if a real user was interacting

  • Cannot move the mouse to specific co-ordinates

  • Sometimes has trouble switching between different top-level domains, so not good for testing external links

  • Cypress is a newer tool with less extensive documentation and less community support

Protractor advantages:

  • More powerful because it is Selenium-based - it can switch between tabs, it can handle external links to other domains, it can handle iFrames, simulate keypresses and clicks, and move the mouse to specific co-ordinates within the browser.

  • More extensive community support and documentation

Protractor disadvantages:

  • Slower and more brittle - in general there is a higher likelihood of cryptic and/or intermittent errors which may cause your tests to fail even though there is nothing wrong with your application

  • For highly experienced automation engineers, the fundamental "brittle" nature of Selenium can be worked around - it can be reliable but only if you really know what you are doing

  • Less graceful handling of promises - relies on async/await or .then to manage the order of execution. Therefore it is a bit harder to read the code.

  • Harder to set up, and the method of setup impacts its reliability. For example, a hub/node configuration where the selenium jar is on a different physical machine than the browser under test will cause unreliability in your tests. Not everyone knows about this type of thing, so it's common to find Selenium frameworks that are set up poorly.

It's probably better to use Cypress if

  • you're at a smaller company and have a close relationship with developers who can help write hooks or stubs in their code to assist your testing

  • you don't need to do things like switch between tabs or test links to external top-level domains

It's probably better to use Protractor if

  • You might need to switch between tabs or test external links to other domains within the scope of your framework

  • You want to use a more accurate simulation of how a real user interacts with a browser (i.e. click at this location, type these keys)

  • You're at a company where you won't have any support from developers in writing hooks or stubs to make their code more testable in a less powerful framework like Cypress

See more
Jian Wang
Web Engineer at sentaca · | 1 upvotes · 194.9K views
Recommends

Please try Handow, the e2e tool basing on Puppeteer.

Gherkin syntax compatible

Chrome/Chromium orentied, driven by Puppeteer engine

Complete JavaScript programming

Create test suites rapidly without coding (or a little bit), basing on built-in steps library

Schedule test with plans and arrange stories with sequential stages

Fast running, execute story groups in parallel by multi-workers

Built-in single page report render

Cover page view, REST API and cookies test

https://github.com/newlifewj/handow

http://demo.shm.handow.org/reports

See more
Decisions about Cypress and Rainforest QA
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
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of Cypress
Pros of Rainforest QA
  • 29
    Open source
  • 22
    Great documentation
  • 20
    Simple usage
  • 18
    Fast
  • 10
    Cross Browser testing
  • 9
    Easy us with CI
  • 5
    Npm install cypress only
  • 2
    Good for beginner automation engineers
  • 13
    Cross-browser testing
  • 7
    Powerful API
  • 7
    QA
  • 7
    Super-simple test creation
  • 6
    Easy way to get real front-end smoke tests
  • 5
    Simple
  • 5
    CI Integration
  • 3
    Manual regression testing results in 30 mins

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of Cypress
Cons of Rainforest QA
  • 21
    Cypress is weak at cross-browser testing
  • 14
    Switch tabs : Cypress can'nt support
  • 12
    No iFrame support
  • 9
    No page object support
  • 9
    No multiple domain support
  • 8
    No file upload support
  • 8
    No support for multiple tab control
  • 8
    No xPath support
  • 7
    No support for Safari
  • 7
    Cypress doesn't support native app
  • 7
    Re-run failed tests retries not supported yet
  • 7
    No support for multiple browser control
  • 5
    $20/user/thread for reports
  • 4
    Adobe
  • 4
    Using a non-standard automation protocol
  • 4
    Not freeware
  • 3
    No 'WD wire protocol' support
    Be the first to leave a con

    Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

    - No public GitHub repository available -

    What is 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.

    What is Rainforest QA?

    Rainforest gives you the reliability of a QA team and the speed of automation, without the hassle of managing a team or the pain of writing automated tests.

    Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

    What companies use Cypress?
    What companies use Rainforest QA?
    Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
    Learn More

    Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

    What tools integrate with Cypress?
    What tools integrate with Rainforest QA?

    Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

    Blog Posts

    GitHubPythonDocker+24
    13
    17083
    What are some alternatives to Cypress and Rainforest QA?
    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.
    TestCafe
    It is a pure node.js end-to-end solution for testing web apps. It takes care of all the stages: starting browsers, running tests, gathering test results and generating reports.
    Puppeteer
    Puppeteer is a Node library which provides a high-level API to control headless Chrome over the DevTools Protocol. It can also be configured to use full (non-headless) Chrome.
    WebdriverIO
    WebdriverIO lets you control a browser or a mobile application with just a few lines of code. Your test code will look simple, concise and easy to read.
    Jest
    Jest provides you with multiple layers on top of Jasmine.
    See all alternatives