This article has been relocated here.
Posted by milinpatel17 on July 4, 2014 in Misc, Testing Articles, Testing Concepts
Tags: automation, automation tester, automation testing, manual, manual tester, manual testing, scripting, software tester, Software Testing, Tester, testing
July 22, 2014 at 12:56 pm
Excellent though you have to consider one thing if u have certain amount of developement knowledge with those automation tools you can do far better testing with reduce in time but i would be agree with you on this for the small scale industries where in the 20 developers only single tester and and the organization authorities (including TL) who doesn’t have any idea of how or what actually the testing is …it becomes difficult for manually testing too…though you can make them fool by telling or showing that you are using certain tools for automation and it does reduce the times , it does produce some certain error etc etc.. it is complicated to say that manual testing can’t go far away or with automation tool knowledge you are the king..
Let me Share you one Scenario with you :
when your automation tester finds the bug and the developer can’t resolve that same bug then what’s the use of using that automation tool..simply it does waste the time and to certain amount of frustration for automation tester..
So it would be wise to say that it all depends upon the organizations that whether they really need to go for automation ?
July 20, 2014 at 2:18 am
You’ve done well here, but you could go one step further. There is no such thing as manual testing, any more than there is “manual research” or “manual management” or “manual parenting”. All of these activities may be assisted or extended by tools, but they are complex cognitive activities, not “manual”. We talk about this here: http://www.satisfice.com/blog/archives/856
Moreover, the “extremely intelligent” tool that you refer to above may be powerful, but it has no intelligence whatsoever.
Finally, the test tool does not generate a bug. The test tool helps the tester to reveal a bug.
If we want to understand testing clearly and describe it to others, it’s important to be precise in our language.
I’m glad that you’re working to dispel some of the misconceptions and falsehoods about testing.
LikeLiked by 1 person
July 20, 2014 at 8:41 am
That is some really good insight given by you! I will definitely look into it. And yes, I will go thorough that post you’ve mentioned and learn from it.
As a newbie in this field(that’s what I consider with just 2+ years experience), I’ve learnt a lot from you and James(through your blogs satisfice and and developsense).
With this post I wanted to teach the world that with the use of tools you can make your life a little easy, but you can never make the tools your life! I hope I’ve succeeded even a tiny bit and seeing this comment from you gives me hope that I’m on the right path.
Thank you for your thought and the pointers about the terms “manual research” or “manual management” or “manual parenting”.
Always looking forward to learn more from you as well as James!
July 7, 2014 at 10:01 pm
July 10, 2014 at 9:39 pm
I’m glad you liked it!
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google+ account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 671 other followers
Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries (RSS) and Comments (RSS)