Yes, high-quality websites, backed by user behaviour testing and codeless/low code automation, perform better.

Yes, automated testing is worth it when combined with manual (user behaviour) testing and using codeless/low code tools.

Yes, too much domain knowledge can lead to biases and assumptions, potentially missing user behavior nuances.

Enhancing Quality Assurance and Cost-Efficiency at END. Clothing with DoesQA

The primary advantages of all these tools are the same; Speed, Ease and Test Reliability. With intuitive user interfaces, tests can be created and maintained faster and without coding experience.

This video covers the basics of working with slow elements. It shows how to use different Wait For options, including Wait For Enabled, and discusses time-based pauses and why waiting is generally better.

Common terms in automation testing and what they mean.

This video looks at some basic navigation Nodes in DoesQA, including Go To, Back, Forward and Reload.

Retrying failed automated tests can be useful for diagnosing flaky tests, but should not be a method to ignore or dismiss them.

No, using only one testing framework can limit the effectiveness of testing, just like painting a room with only one brush.

The ideal ratio of Quality Engineers to Developers varies based on project complexity and size, but a commonly suggested range is 3-4 developers per Quality Engineer

While developers have valuable skills, they're not necessarily the best testers as their perspective may be biased towards their own code.