--- description: Reviews zu BrowserStack Software: Systemübersicht, Funktionen, Preisinformationen und Ratings & Reviews. Entdecke kostenlose Live-Demos und vergleiche BrowserStack mit ähnlichen Programmen. image: https://gdm-localsites-assets-gfprod.imgix.net/images/software_advice/og_logo-55146305bbe7b450bea05c18e9be9c9a.png title: BrowserStack | Bewertungen, Preise und Demos – SoftwareAdvice DE --- Breadcrumb: [Startseite](/) > [Bugtracker](/directory/4721/bug-tracking/software) > [BrowserStack](/software/200650/browserstack) # BrowserStack Canonical: https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/200650/browserstack Seite: 1 / 32\ Weiter: [Nächste Seite](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/200650/browserstack?page=2) > BrowserStack ist eine browserübergreifende und Anwendungstestsoftware, die Unternehmen in verschiedenen Branchen dabei unterstützt, automatisierte Tests in der Cloud zu erleichtern. Zu den wichtigsten Funktionen gehören das Zyklieren von API-Schlüsseln, die Überprüfung von Sicherheitsfragebögen, die Bereitstellung und Aufhebung der Bereitstellung von Nutzern, IP-Whitelisting und Geolocation-Tests. Teams, die BrowserStack verwenden, können IPs für eingehenden und ausgehenden Datenverkehr von Remote-Geräten auf die Whitelist setzen und sicher über IP-Zugriffsbeschränkungen testen. Admins können Dashboard-Ansichten anpassen, Unterteams erstellen und Teams parallele Threads gemäß ihren Testanforderungen zuweisen. Darüber hinaus können Entwicklungsfachkräfte die Leistung von Automatisierungstests und Filteranalysen nach Builds, Teams, Raten, Fehlern, Browser- und Geräteabdeckung und mehr bewerten. BrowserStack bietet SAML-basierte (Security Assertion Markup Language) SSO (Single Sign-On)-Funktionen und erweiterte lokale Tests mit Transparenz und Kontrolle über offene Tunnel, Unterstützung für PACS (Picture Archiving and Communication System)-basiertes Proxying und Admin-Kontrolle über lokale Einstellungen. Das Produkt ist im Rahmen eines Monats-/Jahresabonnement verfügbar und der Support erfolgt über Online-Anfrageformulare. > > Bewertung: **4.6/5** von 775 Nutzern. Top bewertet für **Weiterempfehlungsquote**. ----- ## Kurzstatistiken und Ratings | Metrik | Bewertung | Detail | | **Gesamt** | **4.6/5** | 775 Nutzerbewertungen | | Bedienkomfort | 4.6/5 | Auf Basis der Gesamtbewertungen | | Kundenbetreuung | 4.4/5 | Auf Basis der Gesamtbewertungen | | Preis-Leistungs-Verhältnis | 4.2/5 | Auf Basis der Gesamtbewertungen | | Funktionen | 4.5/5 | Auf Basis der Gesamtbewertungen | | Empfehlungsprozentsatz | 90% | (9/10 Weiterempfehlungsquote) | ## Über den Anbieter - **Unternehmen**: BrowserStack - **Gegründet**: 2011 ## Gewerblicher Kontext - **Startpreis**: 39,00 $ - **Preismodell**: (Kostenlose Version verfügbar) (Kostenlose Testversion) - **Zielgruppe**: Selbstständig, 2–10, 11–50, 51–200, 201–500, 501–1.000, 1.001–5.000, 5.001–10.000, 10.000+ - **Bereitstellungen und Plattformen**: Cloud, SaaS, webbasiert, Mac (Desktop), Windows (Desktop) - **Unterstützte Sprachen**: Englisch - **Verfügbare Länder**: Amerikanische Jungferninseln, Australien, Brasilien, Britische Jungferninseln, Deutschland, Dänemark, Indien, Irland, Israel, Kanada, Mexiko, Singapur, Südafrika, Vereinigte Arabische Emirate, Vereinigte Staaten, Vereinigtes Königreich ## Funktionen - A/B Testing - API - Aktivitäts-Dashboard - Aktivitäts-Verfolgung - Aktivitätsüberwachung - Alarmfunktion / Benachrichtigungen - Alerts/Escalation - Anforderungsbasiertes Testen - Anforderungsmanagement - Anmerkungen - Anomalieerkennung - Anpassbare Berichte - Anpassbare Felder - Anpassbare Fragen - Anpassbare Kategorien - Anpassbare Vorlagen - Archivierung & Aufbewahrung - Audit Trail - Aufgabenmanagement - Automated Testing ## Integrationen (16 insgesamt) - Appium - Bitbucket - CircleCI - Cypress - Espresso - GitHub - Jenkins - Jira - Microsoft Visual Studio - Netlify - Slack - Travis CI - Trello - Tricentis qTest - WordPress ... und 1 weitere Integrationen ## Optionen für Kundensupport - E-Mail/Helpdesk - FAQ/Forum - Wissensdatenbank - Telefon-Support - Chat ## Category - [Bugtracker](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4721/bug-tracking/software) ## Ähnliche Kategorien - [Bugtracker](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4721/bug-tracking/software) - [Automated Testing Tools](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4187/automation-testing/software) - [Testmanagement-Tools](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4622/test-management-tools/software) - [Testing Tools](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4316/performance-testing/software) - [Observability-Tools](https://www.softwareadvice.de/directory/4534/observability/software) ## Alternativen 1. [TestRail](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/76542/testrail) — 4.3/5 (179 reviews) 2. [Userlytics](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/88642/userlytics) — 4.7/5 (55 reviews) 3. [Hotjar](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/136486/hotjar) — 4.6/5 (545 reviews) 4. [Tricentis Testim](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/201829/testim) — 4.6/5 (50 reviews) 5. [Screeb](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/335937/screeb) — 4.5/5 (42 reviews) ## Nutzerbewertungen ### "BrowserStack Test Observability Finally Gave Us Clear Visibility Into Playwirght Flakiness and Build Health" — 4.0/5 > **Vishal** | *2. April 2026* | Informationstechnologie & -dienste | Empfehlungsbewertung: 9.0/10 > > **Vorteile**: I like that the Test Observability dashboard (especially the Build Runs view) has been a game changer for our Playwright automation pipeline. I can instantly see every build's test status with color-coded breakdowns (green for passed, red for failed, pink for flaky), exact failure categories like "To be investigated", and session durations. It integrates seamlessly with our CI/CD workflows, and the excellent, parallel sessions spin up quickly, and I love how easy it is to debug a flaky test right from the dashboard without digging through logs. > > **Nachteile**: The only minor gripe is that scaling up parallel sessions for larger teams pushes you into higher plans pretty quickly, which can feel a bit pricey if you're not running massive volumes daily. Also, the free trial reminder banner is a constant nudge (mine ends in 29 days(, but that's understandable. > > We previously struggled with an inconsistent test environment and zero visibility into why Playwright tests were failing or flaking in CI. BrowserStack solves both by giving us real-device/browser coverage without maintaining our own infrastructure and, more importantly, by providing actionable test health insights through Test Observability. ----- ### "Reliable and Efficient Testing Platform with Minor Drawbacks" — 5.0/5 > **Arfa** | *26. März 2026* | Bekleidung & Mode | Empfehlungsbewertung: 9.0/10 > > **Vorteile**: its extensive real device and browser coverage, which makes cross-browser testing seamless and reliable. The ease of use and quick setup allow teams to start testing without heavy configuration. It significantly speeds up testing cycles and helps identify issues early, improving overall product quality > > **Nachteile**: its pricing, which can be quite high for smaller teams. Additionally, automation setup and debugging can be a bit complex, and session timeouts or flaky connections sometimes impact the overall testing experience. > > My overall experience with BrowserStack has been positive. It provides a reliable platform for cross-browser and real device testing, making it easier to identify and fix issues across different environments. The interface is user-friendly, and it helps speed up testing cycles significantly. While there are occasional performance lags and the pricing can be a concern, the overall value it delivers in terms of efficiency and test coverage makes it a strong tool for QA teams ----- ### "Easier to use simulators/emulators" — 1.0/5 > **Zach** | *23. März 2026* | Konsumgüter | Empfehlungsbewertung: 0.0/10 > > **Vorteile**: It had a decent availability of Android and iOS mobile devices and OS versions, including new OS versions. That's about it. > > **Nachteile**: Issue resolution, support, lots of downtime and issues that would cause test failures - all resulting in really poor usage as an automated testing device provider > > It was a large part of my job just tracking failures on browserstack devices, hounding their support to fix things, and triaging flaky test failures that stemmed from excessively variable device states. It is not worth it to use this provider for automated testing for this reason alone. Use simulators and emulators. They are sufficient for catching 99.99% of issues. ----- ### "Genuinely solved our cross-platform testing headache" — 5.0/5 > **Chirag** | *12. Mai 2026* | Informationstechnologie & -dienste | Empfehlungsbewertung: 9.0/10 > > **Vorteile**: - The real device coverage is what sold me. Pixel, Samsung Galaxy series, Xiaomi, OnePlus, older Motorola devices - they are all there. For Flutter and Ionic builds especially, this matters because the rendering can behave very differently on OEM skins than on a clean Pixel emulator. - App Live is fast. Drag an APK or IPA in, pick a device, and you are testing within a minute. No cable, no adb, no "why won't my Mac see this phone today." - The dev tools inside the session are genuinely useful - Logcat, network inspection, device logs, screenshots, screen recording. I can actually debug a remote device almost like it's plugged in. - App Automate plays nicely with our CI. We use it with GitHub Actions and it just runs. The Appium support is solid for both native Android and Flutter/Ionic test suites. - Network throttling and GPS simulation have caught real bugs for us - stuff like map features breaking on slow 3G, or location permissions behaving oddly in certain regions. - The iOS side is equally good, which matters because as a Flutter/Ionic developer I'm constantly switching between platforms and don't want a separate tool for each. > > **Nachteile**: - Pricing. Once you want parallel test runs for a real CI setup, the cost climbs fast. For a small team or solo developer it's a real consideration. - Older devices are sometimes laggy or freeze partway through a session. Usually a reconnect fixes it but it breaks flow. - App installs occasionally fail the first time, especially on certain Xiaomi or Huawei devices. Retry usually works but it's annoying. - Session timeouts on the cheaper plans feel short when you're doing thorough manual QA. > > Honestly, before BrowserStack we were juggling a drawer full of old phones and a bunch of emulators, and it was a mess. Half the bugs we'd find in production were things like "works on Pixel, breaks on Samsung" or "fine on Android 12, weird padding on Android 10." Now most of that gets caught before release. It's not perfect, and the pricing makes me wince sometimes, but I would struggle to go back to how we worked before. ----- ### "Reliable and Easy-to-Use Testing Platform" — 5.0/5 > **Bhargavi** | *17. November 2025* | Computer-Software | Empfehlungsbewertung: 10.0/10 > > **Vorteile**: BrowserStack makes cross-browser and cross-device testing extremely easy. I can instantly test on real devices without needing to maintain any setup. The interface is very user-friendly, and the performance is fast and reliable. It also supports a wide variety of browsers and OS combinations, which helps a lot in QA. > > **Nachteile**: Sometimes the session takes a few seconds to load, especially on mobile devices. A few older device configurations are slow or laggy. The pricing is also a bit high for small teams. Apart from that, everything works well. > > Overall, my experience with BrowserStack has been very positive. It has helped save a lot of time in testing by giving instant access to real devices and browsers. The platform is stable, easy to use, and perfect for ensuring quality across multiple environments. It has become an essential tool in my workflow. ----- Seite: 1 / 32\ Weiter: [Nächste Seite](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/200650/browserstack?page=2) ## Links - [Auf SoftwareAdvice anzeigen](https://www.softwareadvice.de/software/200650/browserstack) ## Diese Seite ist in den folgenden Sprachen verfügbar | Sprache | URL | | de | | | en | | | en-AU | | | en-GB | | | en-IE | | | en-NZ | | | fr | | ----- ## Strukturierte Daten