Software Alternatives & Startups

HTTPie VS CrossBrowserTesting

Compare HTTPie VS CrossBrowserTesting and see what are their differences

HTTPie

CLI HTTP that will make you smile. JSON support, syntax highlighting, wget-like downloads, extensions, and more.

Rating
0 reviews
Pricing
Open source
CrossBrowserTesting

Browser Testing made simple! Run automated, visual, and manual tests on 1500+ real browsers and mobile devices. Test more browsers, in less time.

Rating
0 reviews
Note: These products don't have any matching categories. If you think this is a mistake, please edit the details of one of the products and suggest appropriate categories.

Which is more popular?

Based on our record, HTTPie should be more popular than CrossBrowserTesting. It has been mentioned 59 times since March 2021.

social mentions
59 vs 6
API Tools popularity
100% vs 0%
alternatives listed
37 vs 168

Base details

Website, pricing, platforms and company facts side by side.

HTTPie
CrossBrowserTesting
Website httpie.io crossbrowsertesting.com
Pricing
Open source
Listed in

Features and specs

What each product offers, as listed by its team.

HTTPie 6 features
CrossBrowserTesting 7 features
  • User-Friendly Syntax
    HTTPie offers a simplified and intuitive syntax for making HTTP requests compared to tools like curl. This makes it easier to use, especially for beginners.
  • JSON Support
    HTTPie automatically handles JSON data, making it simple to send and receive JSON payloads. It formats JSON responses in a readable way.
  • Cross-Platform
    HTTPie can be used on multiple operating systems including Windows, macOS, and Linux, ensuring broad compatibility.
  • Plugin Support
    HTTPie supports extensions and plugins that can extend its functionality, offering users the ability to customize their experience.
  • Automatic Headers
    Certain headers are automatically generated by HTTPie, reducing the need to manually specify common headers like Content-Type.
  • Color-coded Output
    The tool offers color-coded and formatted output, making it easier to read and debug HTTP responses.

Possible disadvantages

  • Performance
    HTTPie's performance may be slower compared to more stripped-down tools like curl due to its additional features and user-friendly design.
  • Dependency on Python
    HTTPie is a Python-based tool, requiring users to have Python installed. This may add complexity for users who do not already have a Python environment set up.
  • Learning Curve for Advanced Features
    While basic usage is straightforward, getting the most out of HTTPie's advanced features may require additional learning.
  • Not Pre-Installed
    Unlike curl, HTTPie is not pre-installed on most Unix-based systems, requiring an extra step for installation.
  • Limited Raw Socket Options
    HTTPie lacks some low-level networking capabilities and raw socket options available in other tools, limiting its functionality for some advanced use cases.
  • Wide Range of Browsers and Devices
    CrossBrowserTesting offers a large selection of browsers and devices, allowing developers to test their applications in various environments to ensure compatibility.
  • Live Testing
    Users can perform live interactive testing on real devices, enabling them to manually verify the behavior of their application and catch issues that automated tests might miss.
  • Automated Testing Integration
    The platform provides integration with popular testing frameworks and tools such as Selenium, Appium, and others, facilitating automated testing workflows.
  • Visual Testing
    CrossBrowserTesting offers visual testing capabilities, allowing users to compare screenshots from different browsers to identify design inconsistencies.
  • Comprehensive Reports
    Detailed test reports with screenshots and logs are generated, helping users to quickly identify and address issues found during testing.
  • Parallel Testing
    The service supports parallel testing, enabling users to run multiple tests simultaneously, significantly reducing the overall testing time.
  • Easy-to-Use Interface
    The user interface is intuitive and user-friendly, making it easy for both beginners and experienced testers to navigate and utilize the platform effectively.

Possible disadvantages

  • Cost
    CrossBrowserTesting can be expensive, especially for small teams or individual developers who might find the subscription plans to be cost-prohibitive.
  • Performance
    Tests on real devices can sometimes be slow due to the availability and network constraints, which can affect the overall efficiency of the testing process.
  • Limited Mobile Devices
    While the platform includes a variety of devices, the selection might not cover all the latest models or less common devices, potentially limiting testing coverage.
  • Learning Curve for Advanced Features
    Some advanced features and integrations might require a learning curve, which could be challenging for users who are not familiar with automated testing or the specific tools supported.
  • Test Timeout Issues
    Occasional issues with test timeouts have been reported, which can disrupt the testing process and require reruns or additional troubleshooting.

Analysis

An editorial look at what each product does well and who it suits.

HTTPie
CrossBrowserTesting

Overall verdict

  • HTTPie is highly regarded by developers for its ease of use and powerful capabilities when dealing with APIs and web services. Its design focuses on making the command-line experience as seamless and productive as possible, making it a good choice for both beginners and experienced developers.

Why this product is good

  • HTTPie is popular due to its user-friendly command-line interface which simplifies making HTTP requests. It provides a more readable output compared to traditional tools like curl, highlighting syntax and formatting JSON responses nicely. It also supports plugins, which extend its functionality, and includes features like HTTPS by default, persistent sessions, and intuitive URL parsing.

Recommended for

  • Developers who frequently interact with RESTful APIs and require an efficient tool for testing and debugging.
  • Users who prefer a clean and human-friendly command-line interface.
  • Those who need a flexible tool that can be extended with plugins to suit specific needs.
  • Anyone looking for an alternative to curl with an emphasis on simplicity and readability.

Overall verdict

  • CrossBrowserTesting is generally regarded as a good solution for cross-browser testing needs, particularly for teams that require real-time testing and robust automation capabilities. Its ease of use, extensive browser/device coverage, and integration options make it a strong choice for many development and QA teams.

Why this product is good

  • CrossBrowserTesting is considered a valuable tool because it provides a cloud-based platform for testing websites and mobile applications across different browsers, devices, and operating systems. It enables developers and QA teams to ensure that their applications function correctly on various platforms without needing to maintain a complex setup of physical devices. The platform offers real-time debugging, automated screenshot testing, and integration with various CI/CD tools, which streamlines the testing process.

Recommended for

    This service is highly recommended for software development teams, QA engineers, and web developers who need to ensure compatibility and functionality of their web applications across multiple browsers and devices. It is particularly useful for organizations with a focus on maintaining high-quality user experiences across various platforms.

Videos

Walkthroughs and reviews on video.

HTTPie 2 videos + Add
CrossBrowserTesting 1 video + Add

Testing REST APIs con HTTPie y Postman

More videos

  • - Testing REST APIs con HTTPie y Postman - Parte 3

Cross Browser Testing Tool Comparison – LambdaTest vs. CrossBrowserTesting

Category popularity

How often each product is chosen within a category, 0–100% relative to the other.

Score bands 0–20 21–40 41–50 51–60 61–100
HTTPie
CrossBrowserTesting
100% 100%
0% 0%
0% 0%
100% 100%
100% 100%
CLI
0% 0%
0% 0%
100% 100%

User comments

Share your experience with using HTTPie and CrossBrowserTesting. For example, how are they different and which one is better?

Log in or Post with

Reviews and articles

External articles and on-site reviews we used to compare the two products.

HTTPie no reviews yet
CrossBrowserTesting no reviews yet

View more

We have no reviews of CrossBrowserTesting yet. Be the first one to post

Social recommendations and mentions

Recommendations tracked on public social media and blogs since March 2021.

HTTPie 59 mentions
CrossBrowserTesting 6 mentions

View more

  • How can I test my site on safari if I don't have a Mac ?
    Yeah I moved on pretty quick from browserstack, but it seems to be the most popular. I've tried crossbrowsertesting.com but at the moment I really like app.lambdatest.com. Source: about 4 years ago
  • great list of "cool" sites from hnews
    Https://geizhals.de/ - this is a german site but the UI is nice and you can find a lot of stuff. Https://www.gsmarena.com/search.php3? - a phone search site. When I was at https://crossbrowsertesting.com we used this site a... - Source: dev.to / over 4 years ago
  • Learn How To Create, Test and Deploy a Single Page App with Vue 3 + Vite and Pinia
    Fortunately we don’t need to install, nor configure, any other tools, unless maybe some fancy reporters, but for now we can get everything we need in terms of end-to-end automated testing out of Nightwatch. Besides Chrome, Nightwatch has... - Source: dev.to / almost 5 years ago

View more

Alternatives to HTTPie and CrossBrowserTesting

When comparing HTTPie and CrossBrowserTesting, you can also consider the following products.