ukd1

19 ms·

211.
by ukd1 5y ago
Digging a little more - their pricing; our free plan seems equivalent (yet with better data retention, and no user limits, and email testing included) to their $99/mo plan.
212.
by ukd1 5y ago
The obvious major difference is the ability to use the crowd as well as automate; which I believe is unique to Rainforest. Outwardly, the way they automate is very similar to us. Looking a little deeper, it seems like they _do_ use the DOM
213.
by ukd1 5y ago
Good question; the enterprise focused product relied on a much more hands-on onboarding, and day-to-day support - sometimes even to the level of professional services - to use the product. Moving to self-serve exposed all of the hard-edges
214.
by ukd1 5y ago
No plans to - our focus is on helping folks improve their product quality. I guess you could probably use it for that if you wished, but it's really not optimized for extracting data from pages.
215.
Launch HN: Rainforest QA (YC S12) – No-Code UI Test Automation
149 points by ukd1 5y ago|88 comments
216.
by ukd1 5y ago
Just running the tests in our Rails project (11k of them) can stress out a ton; we're regularly running it on 80+ cores to keep our test completion time ~3 minutes. M1 Max should let me run all tests locally much faster than I can toda
217.
by ukd1 5y ago
Which are more powerful?
218.
by ukd1 5y ago
It's a part of it, also open-source https://gitlab.com/l0phtcrack/hashcatdll
219.
by ukd1 5y ago
This isn't true; they do ask for proof of residency. Source; I've been twice with folks from the US needing urgent care, and they've been treated, but also coerced into paying and or giving their details. If I were there outs
220.
by ukd1 5y ago
Wasabi is actually pretty great. +1 on this.
221.
by ukd1 5y ago
Came here to ask this; it's essential to have this, as likely you'll do something like was demo'd in the video - start with a single list, maybe move to multiple. Note, the items disappeared.
222.
by ukd1 5y ago
The QL was one of my first computers too, I loved that thing!
223.
by ukd1 5y ago
Also this; especially after watching this happen to DeviantOllam
224.
by ukd1 5y ago
Librem phones, or PinePhone / PineTab. The speed and quality aren't comparable to an iPhone, but to be fair it's open AND a 1/5th the price.
225.
by ukd1 5y ago
The website is super slow for me, which doesn't feel like a good thing.
226.
by ukd1 5y ago
Ya, there are some interesting ones - looks like they sent videos to their entire batch, at least.
227.
by ukd1 5y ago
USB 3/C has really fine grain power control - using "PD" ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_hardware#USB_Power_Deliver... ), it's possible to negotiate the rates pretty finely - so I don't think
228.
by ukd1 5y ago
I think this is mostly true today, but something which we think of as broken and we're fixing. We believe it should be accessible to a wider audience outside of just engineering; there is a lot to do, but we're starting with UI au
229.
by ukd1 5y ago
Some of QA is technical needlessly; we think that's a common issue with tooling today. QA today is just not accessible to folks that think about and manage change to the product, namely product folks. Why don't you think it should
230.
by ukd1 5y ago
Thanks. I agree re unit-tests and integration tests. Mostly we're focused on (and talking about) testing what humans end up using directly - e.g. interfaces to web apps or mobile apps. I think you're wrong re:organizational proble
231.
by ukd1 5y ago
Makes sense. Did y'all try to automate any of it? I've seen situations where things are highly-configurable, and massive at the same time - mostly in the medical industry. Test plans are hard due to interactions between config bei
232.
by ukd1 5y ago
If you want something it's closer to, it's sikuli script. Visually looking at the page (or whatever, tbh), then manipulating it using the keyboard and mouse. It's basically done using a KVM, so much closer to what a user woul
233.
by ukd1 5y ago
Thanks for the luck Travis! Def something we've been edging around for a while. From what we've been seeing, a lot of PMs and no/low code folks already do this kind of thing manually, and don't have tooling for it. RF au
234.
by ukd1 5y ago
IMHO, yep - it's a balance, but the great thing is they can be quick to run, and run locally-easily; which is great for developers to get fast-feedback. Unit testing is unlikely to catch all end-user level issues though; traditional au
235.
by ukd1 5y ago
I think you're pretty on point here; today human nuance is needed to decide WHAT to test as well as HOW MUCH to test. It's also useful for executing some types of tests too (which is why we support both automation, and human testi
236.
by ukd1 5y ago
What do you use to plan it or otherwise manage the process? Is it all manual?
237.
by ukd1 5y ago
This; especially now more apps are being done with no-code tooling (bubble, anyone?) - not a lot of existing tooling work with it, and code-based testing isn't viable even if it did.
238.
by ukd1 5y ago
It's also common practice; usually caused by testing getting under-resourced, bad tooling, or longer shipping cycles (more stuff to test, more pressure to get it out).
239.
by ukd1 5y ago
+1 - I think they should be able to for sure - with current tooling, this is basically impossible without manually doing it; which I've seen a lot of product folks do!
240.
Asking developers to do QA is broken – why anyone should own QA(rainforestqa.com)
192 points by ukd1 5y ago|188 comments

More ›