5 Reasons Why You Must Use Manual Testing

Automation testing has taken the software testing process to another level by accelerating the testing and quality assurance measure. There are many stunning tools which assist analyzers with accelerating the software quality assurance process with automation. Nonetheless, you can't disregard the power of manual testing. The best QA Companies actually utilize manual testing alongside automation to guarantee the best nature of the software. Indeed, manual testing is tedious, yet it is indispensable to guarantee the best quality of the software. This article shares 5 significant reasons that demonstrate why you should use manual testing during the quality assurance process. 

1. It's not possible for anyone to supplant human experience 

The automation tools are incredible to test the software in least sum time, however it will most likely be unable to test those angles which are not modified by the automation script writers. The long stretches of involvement of a software qa engineer can discover more critical defects alongside clear solutions, which probably won't be feasible to log with the automation testing. Moreover, in manual testing the software testing engineer will likewise put his/her insightful and legitimate power which would track down those hidden bugs too, which are hard to track down with the automation testing. 

2. Manual QA can assist you with characterizing if the software is prepared for hardcore qa or not 

Automation tester isn't completely automated. It requires certain human endeavors recorded as a written scripts and running or planning the tests. This can be a tedious cycle toward the start. On the off chance that your software has silly bugs, performing automation qa can be an exercise in futility and endeavors. Then again, an accomplished software qa engineer can distinguish whether the application is prepared for the hardcore testing measure or not initially or by running a small set of manual tests. 

3. Manual testing can touch customized zones 

Just people know the human expectations. The manual testing can use conceptualization and compassionate quality assurance to discover those bugs which can turn into an obstacle in client experience. It very well may be aesthetic issues or confinement quality assurance or something comparative. The manual testing is all the more impressive and effective in such situations. 

4. Some scenarios can't be automated 

There are some experiments which either can't be automated or are too costly to even think about automating. For instance, in small projects, manual testing is more cost effective than automated QA. Additionally, some technical situations, for example, quality assurance the tap gestures on an iPad with automation testing can be costly and tedious. Despite what is generally expected, the manual testing can be quicker and more successful. 

5. Manual quality assurance tests what isn't defined to test 

According to experience of numerous software quality assurance engineers, they discover bugs while it is least anticipated. Along these lines, manual testing performed by the accomplished QA specialists can discover even those bugs which are hidden from logic. In actuality, the automation script is a program and will test just defined test logins. 

Takeaway

Automation quality assurance is good, and point of fact it has its own worth. In any case, we can't overlook the power of manual testing. As per the business influencers, the manual testing services is here to stay and cannot be replaced.