--- description: BrowserStack : qu'en pensent les utilisateurs ? Lisez les avis sur BrowserStack, consultez ses différents prix, tarifs et abonnements ainsi que ses fonctionnalités. image: https://gdm-localsites-assets-gfprod.imgix.net/images/getapp/og_logo-94fd2a03a6c7a0e54fc0c9e21a1c0ce9.png title: BrowserStack Tarif, abonnement, avis | GetApp Canada 2026 --- Breadcrumb: [Accueil](/) > [Logiciels de débogage](/directory/1003/bug-tracking/software) > [BrowserStack](/software/170655/browserstack) # BrowserStack Canonical: https://fr.getapp.ca/software/170655/browserstack Page : 1/32\ Suivant: [Page suivante](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/170655/browserstack?page=2) > BrowserStack est une plateforme de test cross-browser qui permet aux développeurs d'intégrer des outils pour effectuer des tests automatisés, visuels et en direct sur des applications mobiles et des sites web. Les équipes DevOps peuvent également exécuter des tests en local sur les applications WIP (Work In Progress) sans les héberger dans des environnements publics. > > Conclusion : 774 utilisateurs lui ont donné la note de **4.6/5**. Figure au meilleur classement pour **Probabilité de recommander le produit**. ----- ## Statistiques et notes | Métrique | Notation | En détail | | **Note globale** | **4.6/5** | 774 Avis | | Simplicité | 4.6/5 | D'après l'ensemble des avis | | Support client | 4.4/5 | D'après l'ensemble des avis | | Rapport qualité-prix | 4.2/5 | D'après l'ensemble des avis | | Fonctionnalités | 4.5/5 | D'après l'ensemble des avis | | Pourcentage de recommandation | 90% | (9/10 Probabilité de recommander le produit) | ## À propos du vendeur - **Entreprise**: BrowserStack - **Entreprise fondée en**: 2011 ## Contexte commercial - **À partir de**: 39,00 $ US - **Type de licence**: (Version gratuite disponible) (Version d’essai gratuite) - **Public cible**: Travailleur autonome, 2–10, 11–50, 51–200, 201–500, 501–1 000, 1 001–5 000, 5 001–10 000, 10 000+ - **Déploiement et plateformes**: Cloud, SaaS, web, Mac (ordinateur), Windows (ordinateur) - **Langues**: anglais - **Pays disponibles**: Afrique du Sud, Allemagne, Australie, Brésil, Canada, Danemark, Inde, Irlande, Israël, Mexique, Royaume-Uni, Singapour, Émirats arabes unis, États-Unis, îles Vierges américaines, îles Vierges britanniques ## Fonctionnalités - A/B Testing - API - Accès mobile - Alertes/Notifications - Alerts/Escalation - Analyse de la productivité - Analyse des causes profondes - Analyse des tendances - Analyse prédictive - Analyse statique - Analyse visuelle - Annotations - Archivage et rétention - Assurance qualité - Authentification unique - Automated Testing - Benchmarking - Bibliothèque de questions - Capture d'écran - Catégories personnalisables ## Intégrations (16 au total) - Appium - Bitbucket - CircleCI - Cypress - Espresso - GitHub - Jenkins - Jira - Microsoft Visual Studio - Netlify - Slack - Travis CI - Trello - Tricentis qTest - WordPress ... et 1 intégrations supplémentaires ## Ressources d'aide - Service client/courriel - FAQ/forums - Base de connaissances - Support téléphonique - Chat/Clavardage ## Category - [Logiciels de débogage](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/1003/bug-tracking/software) ## Catégories connexes - [Logiciels de débogage](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/1003/bug-tracking/software) - [Logiciels de test de charge](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/1959/load-testing/software) - [Logiciels de test utilisateur](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/2075/user-testing/software) - [Logiciels de gestion des tests](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/3879/test-management-tools/software) - [Outils de test automatisé](https://fr.getapp.ca/directory/389/testing/software) ## Logiciels similaires 1. [QA Wolf](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/2047371/qa-wolf) — 5.0/5 (69 reviews) 2. [Lyssna](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/2041995/usabilityhub-1) — 4.6/5 (86 reviews) 3. [TestRail](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/112767/testrail) — 4.3/5 (179 reviews) 4. [Lightster](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/2073473/lightster) — 4.7/5 (9 reviews) 5. [Userlytics](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/121415/userlytics) — 4.7/5 (55 reviews) ## Avis ### "Reliable Cross-Platform Testing with Some Cost Considerations" — 4.0/5 > **Azmal** | *2 avril 2026* | Gestion de l'enseignement | Taux de recommandation : 7.0/10 > > **Avantages**: The biggest advantage of BrowserStack is its instant access to a wide range of real devices without needing to maintain physical hardware. The ability to perform live, manual testing on both iOS and Android devices directly from the browser is extremely convenient and saves a lot of setup time. I also found the platform very useful for: Quick debugging with real-time interaction Consistent performance across devices and OS versions Ease of use — no complex installation or configuration required Reliable cloud infrastructure, which makes testing smooth even for remote teams Overall, it significantly improves testing efficiency and helps identify real-world issues that emulators often miss. > > **Inconvénients**: The main drawback is the cost, especially for small teams or when you need extended access to real devices for manual testing. I also faced a few practical limitations: Session time limits and concurrency restrictions can slow down testing when multiple testers are involved Occasional lag or latency, particularly when network conditions aren’t ideal Limited free access, making it harder to evaluate thoroughly before committing Device availability issues at peak times (some popular devices are not always instantly accessible) > > My overall experience with BrowserStack has been very positive. It provides a reliable and efficient platform for testing applications across a wide range of real devices and browsers without the need to maintain physical infrastructure. The ability to perform live, manual testing on real iOS and Android devices is a major advantage, helping to identify real-world issues that are often missed in emulators. The platform is easy to use, quick to set up, and integrates well into existing testing workflows. However, there are some limitations, such as pricing, session limits, and occasional latency, which can impact productivity during heavy usage. Overall, it is a powerful and practical solution for cross-platform testing, especially for teams that need quick access to multiple devices, but it may require careful cost management depending on usage. ----- ### "A Reliable Platform for Easy Cross-Browser Testing" — 5.0/5 > **Chetan** | *16 mars 2026* | Services et technologies de l'information | Taux de recommandation : 9.0/10 > > **Avantages**: What I like most about BrowserStack is how easy it makes cross-browser and cross-device testing. Instead of installing and managing multiple browsers or physical devices locally, I can quickly test my web applications on different operating systems, browsers, and real mobile devices directly from the platform. This saves a lot of setup time and makes the overall testing process much more efficient. Another thing I appreciate is the availability of real devices in the cloud. It helps identify UI and responsiveness issues that sometimes don’t appear in local environments. The platform is also quite easy to use, and starting a testing session or switching between devices is smooth. Overall, it simplifies the testing workflow and helps ensure better compatibility across different environments. > > **Inconvénients**: One thing I noticed is that sometimes the sessions can feel a bit slow, especially when connecting to certain devices or browsers. There can be a slight delay while interacting with the remote device, which can affect the testing speed when you are quickly checking multiple scenarios. Another small drawback is that the pricing can feel a bit high for smaller teams or individual developers. Also, occasionally there can be queue times when trying to access popular devices. Overall, these issues are not major, but improving performance consistency and pricing flexibility would make the experience even better. > > My overall experience with BrowserStack has been really smooth and helpful during the development and testing process. It gives quick access to a wide range of browsers and real devices, which makes it much easier to verify how applications behave in different environments without setting up everything locally. What I like most is how convenient it is to reproduce and debug browser-specific issues. Instead of guessing how something might look or work on another device, I can simply open a session and test it directly. This has saved a lot of time during development, especially when checking UI responsiveness and compatibility. Overall, it has become a reliable tool in my workflow for ensuring that applications run consistently across different browsers and devices. ----- ### "Focus on Future Nitche" — 3.0/5 > **Acharaj** | *1 avril 2026* | Services d'information | Taux de recommandation : 7.0/10 > > **Avantages**: Its Test Bed capacities Its Evaluation Matrix Improvisation (which is not live yet) All in one solution > > **Inconvénients**: Self Healing Feature is still not up to the mark Prompt Design Engg \& Self Feedback Looping- You should be focusing on this more. This is the backbone of AI generated tests. Less competitive as compare to their nitche players > > Good, but i think product should be taking a deep review of the other good players in market like TestIM, Promptfoo.com for different features. From there they can get some references \& get good features implemented. ----- ### "Good Coverage for Browser and Device Testing in One Platform" — 5.0/5 > **Rajnikant** | *13 mars 2026* | Services et technologies de l'information | Taux de recommandation : 10.0/10 > > **Avantages**: One of the things I like most about BrowserStack is how easy it makes cross-browser and cross-device testing without needing to maintain a physical device lab. As a Technical Project Manager, it really helps our team speed up QA cycles because developers and testers can quickly check how features behave on different browsers and operating systems in real time. The platform is reliable and the device coverage is impressive, which is useful when managing projects that need to support multiple environments. I also appreciate how smoothly it integrates into our CI/CD pipeline, allowing automated tests to run as part of our release process. Overall, it saves a lot of time and helps us catch compatibility issues early before they reach production. > > **Inconvénients**: One area where BrowserStack could improve is performance consistency, especially during peak usage times. Occasionally, some live testing sessions can feel a bit slow or take time to start, which can interrupt the testing flow for the team. Another challenge is the pricing structure, which can become expensive as the team grows or when you need access to more parallel sessions and devices. For smaller teams or projects with tight budgets, this can be something to consider. That said, while these issues come up from time to time, the overall functionality and convenience of the platform still make it a valuable tool for managing cross-browser testing. > > Overall, my experience with BrowserStack has been very positive. As a Technical Project Manager, it has helped streamline our testing process and made it much easier for the team to validate features across different browsers and devices without maintaining our own infrastructure. It’s particularly helpful during release cycles when we need quick feedback from QA and developers working in parallel. The platform is straightforward to use, and the ability to run both manual and automated tests has improved our testing efficiency. While there are occasional performance delays and the pricing can be a bit on the higher side, the convenience, device coverage, and reliability generally outweigh those concerns for our team. ----- ### "Good tool for cross browser testing with real devices" — 4.0/5 > **Logesh** | *3 avril 2026* | Services et technologies de l'information | Taux de recommandation : 8.0/10 > > **Avantages**: The best part about BrowserStack is that you can access real devices and various browser versions without needing to maintain any physical setup. This makes it easier to test across different environments quickly. The UI is simple and easy to navigate. The live testing feature is useful for quick validations and debugging. > > **Inconvénients**: Sometimes the sessions feel slow or laggy, especially when switching between devices. The pricing can also be a bit high for smaller teams or individual users. > > Overall, my experience with BrowserStack has been positive. As a QA engineer, I mainly use it for cross-browser and responsive testing. It saves a lot of time compared to setting up local environments or using actual devices. I have used it to test UI issues and browser compatibility across various platforms. While there is some room for improvement in its performance, it remains a reliable tool for my daily testing needs. ----- Page : 1/32\ Suivant: [Page suivante](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/170655/browserstack?page=2) ## Liens - [Afficher sur GetApp](https://fr.getapp.ca/software/170655/browserstack) ## Cette page est disponible dans les langues suivantes. | Langue | URL | | de | | | de-AT | | | en | | | en-AE | | | en-AU | | | en-CA | | | en-GB | | | en-IE | | | en-NZ | | | en-SG | | | en-ZA | | | es | | | es-CL | | | es-CO | | | es-MX | | | fr | | | fr-BE | | | fr-CA | | | nl | | | nl-BE | | | pt | | | pt-PT | | ----- ## Données structurées