We really need more helpful automation testing tools

… and visual regression testing is the first and foremost target.

The goal of automating various manufacturing processes is to raise efficiency, from a business point of view. But there is also powerful motivation here for an engineer. When we automate low-level, routine, uninteresting tasks, this opens the way for challenging and creative work. And this is why the concept of automation testing tools is met with great enthusiasm throughout all development teams, not only among business owners aiming for higher ROI.

Having analyzed the QA niche from this angle, we will definitely acknowledge the visual regression testing job as the most important one to be automated, the first one after the unit testing, and maybe even more. Regression means constantly returning to the same verification steps, again and again. When you are doing it manually, you face issues, sooner or later. Unfortunately, any human being can:

a) become tired;

b) just lose sensitivity to some small changes over time;

c) wrongly assume correctness of certain elements (‘checked it a thousand of times already and everything was OK!’).

There are many other aspects in UI regression testing sphere where human workforce is a weak link, including the necessity of constant monitoring of changes in product specifications. If you have 100 screenshots in your project requirements, will it be easy to notice a tiny glitch in your UI when it comes to the last one?

Evidently, this kind of work simply MUST be done by machines. An automation testing tool will never get tired or decide not to check some small piece of functionality (‘We didn’t do anything to this part in the latest build, there is just no way it could change!’). And it is much faster, in most cases.

There are downsides of course. They always happen. Implementing an automated testing framework is very time-consuming. Besides, it requires testers to adopt new skills. But if we look at the ever-increasing interest for automated visual regression testing solutions on the Internet, it becomes clear that more and more people in this industry are ready to pay these costs.

Sometimes there are talks about potential damage automation could cause for people in the industry (‘Robots will steal our jobs!’). Well, I cannot be sure about heavy manufacturing or precise hi-tech engineering but in the quality assurance niche, the automation will always be welcomed. Any tester would tell you that, in fact, there is never enough testing: even after a douzen of QA engineers tests the hell out of an app, a newcomer could notice some small thing that needs to be improved. This means a tester could always switch to deeper research or optimization of a product concept once her or his low level tasks are taken by an automated solution.

Too much time is still being spent for visual regression testing and other kinds of repeatable dull checking… The QA niche longs for newer, better automation testing tools!