The practice of automation testing for web applications has been around for over a decade and is still developing. For a high-end user experience, it is crucial to test web apps and make sure they operate as required by the user.
Selenium, Cypress, Playwright, and Puppeteer, to mention a few, are some of the more recent testing tools for web applications. Each of them is an established and well-known open-source testing framework. Cypress is one of the most notable of them; it is a testing framework that is quickly gaining favor as a substitute.
In this article, we will compare Cypress with other test automation frameworks to determine why Cypress is a superior option to other test automation frameworks. To begin, we must first explore each of them separately before examining what makes Cypress unique and why one might prefer it as the alternative.
Let’s start with Selenium, which has long been the standard testing framework for nearly every task involving a browser-based application. Selenium has dominated the testing market.
Selenium
The longest on the market has been selenium. It is the first test automation framework created, and testers have been using it for more than a decade. It is a collection of various UI test automation tools that provides methods for scaling testing for all significant browsers, given that it is compatible with nearly all widely used programming languages, including Java, JavaScript, C, C#, Ruby, PHP, and Python, among others. It allows QA teams and web developers the ability to work with a programming language of their choice.
To automate application tests inside a Web browser, the most recent version of this test automation framework makes advantage of the WebDriver interface. Users can insert commands into an application using Selenium and then record the application’s response. To find performance and reliability problems in the applications they create, developers can run automated testing by building scripts to execute commands automatically.
Selenium is an excellent tool for testing an application before it is put into production since it, like the majority of test automation frameworks, can simulate user interactions with an application. In other words, frameworks like Selenium make it easier for developers to spot issues without waiting for real-user monitoring systems to provide feedback.
However, as was already mentioned, Selenium supports all of the main web browsers, and each browser has a unique automation driver. As a result, Selenium has to configure different test environments for each browser, such as the gecko driver for Firefox, ChromeDriver for Chrome, and so forth, which increases the setup time and effort.
Key Strengths of Selenium
Without a doubt, Selenium has been and continues to be a popular test automation tool. Its popularity is a result of the following noteworthy qualities it offers.
- Compatibility with a variety of operating systems, including Windows, Mac OS, Linux, and Unix.
- Have the freedom to select from a variety of programming languages, including Java, JavaScript, Perl, Ruby, Python, etc.
- Compatibility with all current browsers, including Edge, Firefox, Chrome, and Safari.
- Relevant and concise APIs.
- Supports running automation scripts in parallel.
- A sizable community and open source.
Shortcomings of Selenium
There are several restrictions with Selenium despite all of its cutting-edge features that support diversity and usability. These restrictions include.
- Only web-based programs can use it. Selenium cannot automate Windows systems.
- Addressing page load and sync problems is complicated. Additionally, it cannot accurately handle pop-up windows.
- Absence of built-in commands for creating test results automatically.
- Since it depends on TestNG or Cucumber, Selenium’s reporting feature could be more effective.
- Barcodes and captchas can’t be automated.
- Selenium supports screen capture but doesn’t provide appropriate support for testing photos, video, or audio.
- This tool requires strong programming skills to use, and creating the test environment is more difficult than with Cypress.
- Selenium is only useful for application UI testing; unlike Cypress, it is ineffective for database and unit testing.
Cypress
From a historical viewpoint, Cypress is far more recent than Selenium. However, it is not developed on top of Selenium like many automation tools, therefore it is not constrained by Selenium’s capabilities.
A front-end testing tool based on JavaScript is called Cypress. It has been created with the changing demands of the contemporary web in mind. It addresses the challenges developers and quality assurance engineers face when testing online apps.
Cypress is a complete test suite with runner and reporting capabilities. Cypress is a very user-friendly tool because it has a special DOM manipulation technique and can run straight in a browser. One of the other distinctive qualities of this tool that accounts for its steadily increasing popularity is its interactive test runner capabilities, which perform all the commands. The framework can capture screenshots and videos while running tests.
In comparison to other testing tools, Cypress tests are relatively simple. It allows users to create quicker, simpler, and more trustworthy test cases. Cypress is a tool designed to parallelize the processes of development and testing. In other words, it has all the special qualities that can live up to or even beyond all of your expectations.
Unit testing and front-end integration are Cypress’s main uses. For a front-end developer who is skilled in JavaScript, Cypress can be a miraculous tool because its agile methodology enables front-end devs to write original test cases on their own. Depending on the needs of the user, Cypress’s reliance only on JavaScript can be both a strength and a weakness.
Key Strengths of Cypress
Cypress is regarded as a quick, reliable, and cutting-edge tool for testing automation. Compared to selenium, cypress has fewer limits. It enables the creation of web automation scripts more quickly and simply. The following are some of the main characteristics it offers-
- Cypress’ architectural design allows for faster and more reliable test execution than competing automation solutions.
- It provides the ability to take screenshots during test execution so that it is possible to view what the user will see when the app is processing a particular command. If the test suite is being run from the command line interface, it can also record a video of the test. This gives the development and QA teams a thorough understanding of what happened and how it happened.
- Other open-source web automation tools do not allow for the use of Cypress API testing.
- It contains a built-in component for developers that offers debugging options to aid developers in quickly and effectively debugging.
- Cypress operates on a real browser compared to other tools that emulate browsers. As a result, Cypress’ tests are quicker and more trustworthy.
- The built-in functionality of Cypress automatically waits before advancing to the next step, in contrast to other tools where wait and sleep are employed to create synchronization in test runs.
- It was thought that Cypress’s restricted browser support was one of its biggest weaknesses, but it has since diversified and now supports browsers like Firefox and Edge in addition to Chrome.
- It has real-time command execution capabilities, precisely records every step of the testing procedure, and continuously provides visual feedback.
Shortcomings of Cypress
Even with this brand-new, amazing tool, there is still much space for development. Some of its more well-known flaws include:
- Cypress, a JavaScript-only framework, takes it away from individuals who are not familiar with the language, due to the lack of support for other languages.
- Driving two browsers at a time is not possible.
- Cypress has limited support for iFrames and doesn’t allow multiple tabs.
- It cannot be used with browsers like Safari and Explorer currently.
- It does not support automated testing of native applications or mobile browsers.
Playwright
Playwright, like Cypress, is not based on Selenium. It is one of the emerging trends in cross-browser testing solutions and is a fully independent solution. The playwright is an end-to-end testing automation framework that is open-source and based on Node.js. Microsoft created and maintains it to work with the popular browser engines Chromium, Webkit, and Firefox.
For developers and testers looking for a flexible JavaScript-based framework for mobile and online applications, Playwright has several capabilities that make it a great option. It supports all popular browsers and a variety of programming languages, including Python, Java, and JavaScript. In-built support is provided for screenshots, videos, and execution traces. Although it has a runner that comes with it, you can also use a different runner.
The Playwright framework supports Windows, MacOS, and Linux in addition to Jest, Mocha, Jasmine, and other well-known testing frameworks that may be utilized in the CI pipeline by leveraging a single API. Along with cross-language functionality, the playwright offers TypeScript, JavaScript, Python, and Java functionalities. Additionally, it permits multiple tabs, origins, and users in a single test.
Key Strengths of Playwright
- Supports a wide range of languages, including .NET C#, Java, Python, and JavaScript.
- Having various features for more complex scenarios while being simple to set up and configure
- The Playwright framework by default includes numerous useful reporters, including HTML, JSON, JUnit, List, Dot, and Line Reporters.
- Supports the use of Browser Context for parallel testing execution.
- Simulates permissions, geolocation, and mobile devices.
- VSCode Debugger, Browser Developer Tools, Playwright Inspector, and Trace Viewers Console Logs are a few debugging tools.
Shortcomings of Playwright
- Native mobile apps are not supported by the playwright.
- The playwright is currently developing, thus there is not much community support, and the user base is still expanding.
Puppeteer
Popular NodeJS-based Open Source Automation Framework Puppeteer is maintained by Google. Javascript programming is possible and it is stable and reasonably simple.
The puppeteer framework enables direct interaction with Chrome-based browsers like Chrome and Chromium, while its more advanced features also enable the use of Firefox.
Key Strengths of Puppeteer
- Easy to set up
- Puppeteer features clear documentation for their API, making it simple to understand and use.
- Mozilla Firefox and Google Chrome are supported.
- Due to its large user base, puppeteer enjoys strong community support.
- Test execution is quicker and more stable because Puppeteer works directly with the browser.
- Installs a functioning version of Chrome automatically.
Shortcomings of Puppeteer
- Chrome and Firefox are the two browsers that offer cross-browser support.
- Only Javascript is supported in terms of programming languages.
- It is merely a thin wrapper; unlike Cypress, it is not an entirely functional automation tool.
What makes Cypress a better choice over the above test automation framework
While the objectives of the above test automation frameworks are similar, they each approach the problem differently. Cypress has a different strategy than the testing tools mentioned. A script is executed in the same loop as the application when it is run inside the browser. Cypress uses the Node.js server to handle any scenarios that need to be handled outside of the browser. As a result, it offers more reliable findings because it can understand everything that takes place both inside and outside the browser.
In short, it can be seen from the comparison that Cypress is a tool for organizing, creating, executing, and troubleshooting tests. It provides a folder structure and sample files as more of a “complete package”.
Cypress is the ideal option for those who are new to testing and prefer a more plug-and-play approach that comes with everything they need to get started. It offers extensive documentation and a large community, which makes it simpler to receive assistance and find solutions to particular cases that users may find difficult.
Cypress automation testing using LambdaTest
Usability and functionality continue to be the major considerations when picking the best testing framework. Because using the proper testing tool ensures that the entire testing process runs smoothly.
Cross-browser testing is necessary to determine how various browsers render the website regardless of the device and browser used to access it. To ensure that the website offers a consistent and seamless user experience, choosing a cloud platform that enables conducting all the tests on actual devices is ideal.
LambdaTest is one such platform that offers automation testing for web, mobile, and APIs online. Using this platform is simple to create and maintain test cases, and it doesn’t take much experience.
LambdaTest is fully compliant and blends seamlessly with all of the commonly used automation testing frameworks like Selenium, Cypress, Playwright, Appium, Puppeteer, etc. By integrating LambdaTest with these frameworks, developers can test their web applications regularly and with confidence on actual browsers, and release high-quality apps with simplicity.
LambdaTest offers a cloud Selenium Grid of more than 3000 real browsers, devices, and operating system versions for fast, on-demand testing, enabling users to test on real devices. Both manual and automated testing applies to this. Utilizing the benefits of parallel testing for quicker testing with greater coverage, LambdaTest’s cloud Selenium Grid enables testers to perform cross-browser tests on various browsers and devices at once.
Additionally, it may be easily integrated with well-known CI/CD platforms like Jira, Jenkins, Travis CI, and many others. Moreover, this cloud has an integrated debugging tool that enables testers to quickly find and fix errors.
Conclusion
All of the above-mentioned test automation frameworks are well-known, reliable, and feature-rich. But when compared to others, Cypress is more user-friendly, and simpler to understand. Users could rely on Cypress for quicker API, front-end, and end-to-end JavaScript testing tests.
This is to keep in mind that even if Cypress is market-leading and feature-rich, none of the above frameworks can be replaced by it. One can utilize any while choosing the one that fills in the gaps that Cypress does not cover. It also depends on the testing requirements, level of testing expertise, and the functionality that is considered essential.
