Can test automation replace human testers
The fact that Software testing is integral to the development and overall success of any product in the IT industry, puts Software development managers worldwide in an all too familiar dilemma. What testing strategy they should pursue? Do they hire the services of a professional testing team for their product verification? Or would they be better served using an automated tool. The debate on the use of Manual testing vis-à-vis Automated testing has been raging on for quite some time now. Before we judge the utility of either, it wouldn't do any harm to briefly enumerate the pros and cons for both. Read more here
If you are automation testing you need a person to develop the test scripts for the project to perform testing. All the analysis must be done by the tester so no one can replace human testers
I agree with statement above. Automation is automation, manual testing is manual testing. Nowadays role of automation is getting bigger and bigger and if you want to earn more money and be valuable on market YOU NEED TO LEARN HOW TO CODE. That's pretty simple. Manual testing won't day in next 10 years. Some software applications need to be tested manually - like applications for medical need or area which is highly critical for application and for business itself and etc. But if you want to have a bright future - learn how to code and develop yourself. You can't rely that you'll be pro in manual testing for forever because you'll mess with two problems - one day your skills will be outdated and guys who learnt the code got more money and fame than you are.
Btw, I disagree with article completely.
False. It's helpful, and there are tons of tools which can give precise result.
Automation testing is not helpful with UI testing
False. You can measure text font size, image size and etc.
When it comes to considerations requiring a human touch such as image contrast or text font size, automated testing cannot be trusted with the most accurate of solutions.
I am manual QA Engineer with willing to be SQA.
Just a couple thoughts on it..
---1. First thought, on ways organizations can reduce need for testing in general.
Think of it as not all companies are the same. Say if you're offering a free product with massive user base, with low risk of repercussions. You can engineer workflows that completely eliminate the QA department like what Facebook has done. How they get around it is...
* High amounts of test automation.
* High level of internal dog fooding. - Do you need QA to test? No, everyone inside the company can be on Facebook all day.
* Gradual regional rollouts - Let the user do the testing in production. With a well though out deployment and rollout strategy, you can be more aggressive with deployments.
Some key innovations that fueling these practices...
* Improved test frameworks
* Distributed architecture allowing pieces to be tested in isolation.
* Improved communication and business tool integration. For example, say a Slack message to a coworker saying "WTF, my facebook feed is broken", a chat bot will create a bug ticket with that tagline, and tag critical features parsed out by natural language processing, and assigned to the corresponding developer.
* Cloud and containerization of web services. - bad software can be plucked out of the cloud and rolled by quickly.
* New advances in big data in the context of deployment. For example, you can deploy the old and new version of an App side by side, then using Big data to monitor the User engagement, and use an evolutionary algorithm to phase out the old system as the newer system gains more user engagement.
---2. Second thought, on the progress of technology.
I don't think of it as "can test automation replace manual testing", when "when will test automation replace human testing". I think the answer to that is in about 26 years, that would be about the time it takes for technology to make 2 breakthrough revolutions.
We're about 9 years away from all jobs making under $20/hr in the US to be replaced by automation. (this is out of an official Whitehouse report - 2025) Fortunately QA professionals in the US make more than that.
Right now we are on the precipice of solving any dumb repetitive actions, whether it's mechanical, or in software. This will get us about 17% of the way there by automating repetitive actions, we still need humans to interpret the results and perform other creative functions. The 2nd revolution needed is that of DSS (decision support science). Although some companies have barely tapped the area of machine intelligence and machine learning. We are making slow, but good amount of progress in DSS.
Post Thanks / Like - 1 Thanks, 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes