Which is better: Manual or Automated Testing?

Software Industry is starting to test their developed products, before the product release. Yet delivered software has defects, test engineers struggle to catch the defects, but they have always reappeared, even with the finest manual testing process. Test automation is a good way to increase the efficiency and coverage of all testing process (Positive and negative conditions).

We need to understand what can be automated and why can’t. Imagine you are working in the environment where new features are coming rapidly and every new feature has a potential to break something existing in some part of the system. Then the product is divided into many phases and has a continuous release cycle is delivered to QA Team, they will start to write the logics for the software and process manual testing in meantime bugs will be raised. So, on each release software will be updated with new feature and bug fixes.

When the above process attained at the last stage of a development phase tester can implement an automated testing script to perform regression testing and ensure whether all functionality is working or not. Here manual testing would become hectic. Developing automation scripts may take up a lot of time, but once developed it will save time in test execution. But on each update of the software you need process with manual test, then update the test script.

Bugs will be raised founds on the manual testing and keep track on the same bug whether it occurring again by automated testing. It means tester needs manual testing to measure the quality of the product and automated to maintain the quality of the product. In the end, it's all about achieving high quality software.

An innovative Automated K2 Application Testing tool https://powertoolz.com.au/