Recently, there has been a massive shift from manual testing and software development to automated ones. With the advent of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and various automation tools, many felt that manual testing would disappear completely. We want to dispel this myth.
Will automation finally replace manual testing?
The misconception is that, according to the technical staff, this transition will cover all areas. In reality, everything is different. Automation can never completely replace manual testing. There are always certain critical areas that require experience in manual management and control. Both methods have pros and cons, so choosing the right method depends on the size and type of software being tested. And for a comprehensive study, it is necessary to use both methods.
Why is automation more effective?
Here are a few benefits of automated testing:
saving time. Instead of manually checking the same user script every time a new feature is released, you can set it to check automatically. For example, registering on the site, filling out forms, opening modal windows, etc.
Reducing the human factor. Where a tester may overlook or miss when testing the same scenario, the program will detect and carefully check with each release.
High level of accuracy . Automation provides more reliable information about software quality. Not only the check of the resource operation itself is automated, but also the preparation of working documentation, and the unloading of statistical data.
Why is it impossible to do without manual testing?
The tester checks all user scripts. A person will understand a person better, “machines” are not yet capable of this. The QA engineer puts himself in the shoes of users and then analyzes the software according to their expectations and requests, which improves the UX. All this is impossible in the case of automated testing, in which all software is tested according to uniform standards and templates.
Manual testing is better for smaller projects. The initial cost of introducing automated testing is much higher than the cost of manual testing. Therefore, the huge cost of implementing automation for small projects is a waste of money. Manual testing in this case will be sufficient.
Both methods have both advantages and disadvantages, so it is unprofessional to talk about the complete replacement of manual and automated testing. Undoubtedly, most of the leading test agencies or test experts are implementing automation in many areas, and yet manual testing is combined with other methods. Each situation requires a certain balance between methods.