When Is It Relevant to Use
Automated and Manual Testing?
Several testing methodologies are practiced: manual, when the testing process is carried out with the participation of a moderator. And automated, when verification is performed using automated systems. In recent years, the second method has become more popular. Taking into account the actualization of AI, automated systems have learned to independently make decisions, learn and process big data. In many cases, a person is simply beyond the power of what a machine learning system can do. Therefore, devops testing is constantly actively developing and improving.
Despite the clear advantages of automated systems, manual testing remains a popular technique for projects with a small scale and in situations where you need to test a single module or fragment of the user interface.
When is manual testing better than analogues?
Most developers agree that manual testing will never go out of style. Today, there are a number of situations where a manual type of testing would be a more appropriate technique:
- Usability testing. Only a moderator can objectively evaluate the attractiveness and functionality of user interface fragments. Taking into account the fact that volumetric data is not taken for analysis and the relevance of the issue is more about consumer preferences, the role of the moderator in the process is more important than any automated processing systems. Due to the “human factor”, this part of QA is practically not amenable to automation.
- For smaller scale projects, manual testing is a more economical option. Modern automation tools cost decent money. At the same time, they need to be configured, coordinated and maintained. If a company implements a large project, then automated functions can pay for themselves. In the case of minor works, it is more relevant and easier to use manual testing and save money on the purchase of software components.
- Minor edits are easier to test manually. The most relevant advantage of automated tests is that auto systems reduce the time. However, you should not discount the time spent on preparing the software environment and developing scripts. Also, automated scripts have to be constantly adjusted after the completed work cycle. For this reason, manual testing for small projects is more demanding, as it does not require special training and financial investments.
- Automated tests are not able to think objectively. Autotest works according to pre-set parameters. While the moderator is free to switch between work cycles, make changes along the way and accumulate material for further innovations.
With manual testing, specialists are not limited by the specified parameters and have a pronounced freedom of action. Only a moderator will be able to objectively assess the defects of the user interface, because in the end the product is made by people and for people.
Benefits of automated testing
In modern mobile application development, automated systems have established themselves as a reliable and demanding tool. Benefits of automated testing include:
- Reuse. The test script is written only once and any number of cycles can be applied, which is important when working with large projects, where the number of user modules is simply huge. For example, in order to test several changes in a social network, you will need to use more than a million user accounts.
- Settings. With automated testing, you can simulate any number of respondents, which is impossible with manual testing.
- Minimization of the "human factor". Even professionals can make mistakes, while the programmed system does not fail and works equally well under any load.
The disadvantages of automated testing include the lack of a “live look”, because the system does not have parameters for evaluating people and feelings of sympathy or antipathy. Therefore, for a qualitative result, it is worth combining these methodologies and using manual or automated testing based on the complexity of the task.
