I see a lot of people being excited about automation, but for a different reason – because they see it as the ultimate solution to all testing problems, the silver bullet, the philosopher’s stone or you name it, it seems to them that human testing might be replaced with automated scripts and everything will be great, we will ship the product in no time and the world will be a better place.
I have to object this. And trust me, this is not a hate talk against automation, in fact it is talk aiming to justify why automation is useful, but useful in the right way, with the right expectations, not the way that we want it to be. So, in order to achieve this, I will have to speak for some bitter truths, about automation.
This is the introduction of the post I wrote last year called “Test automation – the bitter truth”, you can read the whole post here.
This will be extended edition of the post updated with my last thoughts why automation in testing is greatly overestimated and we should change the way we think about it. The talk is aiming to answer the following questions:
Is it really true that test automation can reduce budget costs?
Is it true that test automation can prevent bugs?
Can test automation reduce human error?
Is test automation more reliable?
How much more effective is test automation than human testing?
Can we replace human testing with automated testing?