Manual Testing Vs Automation Testing

Testing plays a vital role in software development as a process of verifying the product's quality, functionality, and dependability before launching into the market. The primary testing approaches are manual testing and automated testing. The emergence of automation testing is a recent development. Each approach has its pros and cons the decision to use one over the other depends on various factors.

Manual testing

Manual testing is a procedure conducted by individuals without the utilization of any automation tools. The testing engineer consistently checks for bugs in a product before its market release. This approach is highly flexible and allows testers to adapt to changes quickly. However, it can be time-consuming and repetitive, making it less efficient for complex or large-scale projects. Manual testing is used when the process is complex and non-repetitive.

Automation testing

Automation testing is done with the help of software tools. Manual testing has certain limitations. Often, it involves the necessity of conducting repetitive tests, a task that can become tedious and time-consuming. In contrast, automation testing employs dedicated tools like Selenium, QTP, and test sigma. These tools facilitate the automation of repetitive task testing procedures and enhance the testing process's overall efficiency and accuracy

Why use automation testing over manual testing?

Time Efficiency:

One of the primary advantages of automation testing is its time-saving capability.

Automated tests can execute quickly and repeatedly, significantly reducing the time required for testing, especially during regression testing. Unlike manual testing, where each test case has to be executed manually, automation allows for parallel execution of multiple test cases, enhancing efficiency and accelerating the testing process. Reduction of Manual Tasks: Automation testing reduces the manual intervention for test execution.

Easy to manage:

Automated tests can be easily managed and maintained over time. Test scripts can be version-controlled and updated as the application evolves, ensuring that testing remains in sync with the development process. This streamlined management leads to consistent and reliable testing procedures, even as the software undergoes changes and updates.

Reduced Human Errors:

Human errors are common in manual testing, as testers might overlook certain scenarios or make mistakes during execution. Automation testing, however, minimizes the risk of errors by consistently following predefined scripts and actions. This leads to higher accuracy in test execution and more reliable results.

Does automation testing replace manual testing?

Absolutely not, while automation testing offers several advantages, it cannot entirely replace manual testing. Both methods have their advantage and disadvantages, and they can complement each other to achieve comprehensive test coverage. Manual testing is important for usability testing, and identifying complex issues that require human intuition. On the other hand, automated testing is ideal for repetitive tasks, regression testing, and maintaining consistent test results.

Conclusion

Manual testing/ Automation testing – Which is better?

There isn't a definite answer to this query, determining whether manual testing or automation testing is better depends on the specific demands of the project, the allocated timeline, the available budget, and the nature of the application subject to testing.