Playwright is awesome, it’s great to see more tooling evolving around it. I evaluated Playwright vs Cypress and Playwright won by a lot. The WebKit support is a

Playwright is awesome, it’s great to see more tooling evolving around it. I evaluated Playwright vs Cypress and Playwright won by a lot. The WebKit support is a big plus. But mostly, Cypress was way too opinionated / prescriptive for my taste, with some deal-breaking trade offs (which, to its maintainers’ credit, they openly document) [0]. Playwright feels much more like you’re simply driving a browser because you are — it gets out of your way like any good tool should, so you can debug your tests instead of your browser automation toolkit. The trade-off of Playwright is that meant, at least early on, that it wasn’t “batteries included” and the ecosystem around it is only just now starting to mature. This is a great time to start using Playwright IMO. One gripe with Playwright is that you lose the ability to easily deploy your tests to services like Browserstack where you can do true multi-device testing. For that you need to use Selenium, or (recently?) Cypress. Because of the nature of Playwright only targeting specific browser engines, it seems unlikely that Browserstack would ever fully support it. But there is probably a place for both, with Playwright closer to the bottom of the pyramid and Selenium / Browserstack toward the top for only the most critical e2e acceptance tests. You could also write your tests in such a way that they could mostly run on Selenium with just a few changes to how you orchestrate them, although then you might end up chasing the “lowest common denominator” of what’s available in either paradigm. As an aside, I’d love to hear the story of how the Puppeteer team left Google for Microsoft while taking their toys with them. I wonder if there is some drama there? :) [0] https://docs.cypress.io/guides/references/trade-offs#Permanent-trade-offs-1 https://docs.cypress.io/guides/references/trade-offs#Permane...