by general » Tue Feb 09, 2010 5:10 pm
The argument for use of open-source tools for testing is a powerful one if your own time and your developers' time is free. In that case, you might start with an open source solution and after several months you would arrive at something that might do the same work as eValid.
But a more likely outcome is that you would find that you had invested many months of your team's effort and you would NOT have a workable quality solution. Worse yet, having sunk so much effort into the open-source option already, you'll find it more and more difficult to declare that effort as wasted -- but you still won't have a working web testing solution.
On the other hand, something as good as eValid -- which has taken YEARS to develop -- could have been used from the outset at a cost to your organization that is far, far less than what you would have spent to little effect choosing the "open source" route.
But we are aware that often managers are unable to grasp the concept of choosing the lesser of the capital cost vs. the long-term non-capital (labor) cost even though study after study after study emphasizes how important it is to get the work done sooner with proven methods, rather than later with newly-invented methods.
________
eValid Tech Support Team