‍In this article, I am going to tell you 5+ Mistakes in Appium Mobile Automation Testing. so if you want to know about it, then keep reading this article. Because I am going to give you complete information about it, so let’s start.

All reputable app developers test their products thoroughly before releasing them to the public, yet sometimes critical flaws must be corrected. Though seemingly inconsequential, they may significantly impact how the general public receives the software. So you need to dig deep into it and fix the problems beforehand.

Today’s article focuses on the same,i.e, “5+ Mistakes in Appium Mobile Automation Testing” The articles entail each bit of information necessary for you to know.

Let’s get started!✨

What is Appium, and why is it popular?

For testing on mobile browsers and apps, Appium is a popular automated testing solution. It verifies that mobile browsers and apps are compatible, usable, and have a sufficient reaction time on a wide range of mobile devices.

Mobile app developers appreciate Appium due to its popularity and its many advantages. Appium’s primary advantages over other mobile automation testing technologies are:

• Appium automation testing is cross-platform and can be run on Windows, iOS, and Android. For Android-only testing, you may use Robotium or Selendroid.
• Mobile testing using Appium, you may test a wide range of mobile apps (native, web, and hybrid).
• This software is compatible with third-party programs like Selenium Grid and Selenium WebDriver.
• Appium’s design is a go-between for automation frameworks and actual test hardware. That’s why it has a smaller memory footprint.

5+ Mistakes in Appium Mobile Automation Testing

Below I am going to tell you about 5+ Mistakes in Appium Mobile Automation Testing, which are as follows.

1. Avoiding the usage of Accessibility ID To be clear, IDs in web applications are not the same as those that provide semantic access. To avoid confusing the two, please be mindful. Be cautious not to confuse or impair the accessibility of your application for the sake of testing since accessibility IDs have a function beyond that of testing. Setting accessibility IDs on your components to make them more testable helps make your mobile app more accessible, provided that you choose accessibility labels that make sense to the humans using them. However, it points to a more fundamental problem that undermines many mobile automation initiatives: teams must ensure that their applications are tested.

2. Overusing XPath
   XPath is a very effective method for locating elements. However, performance is impacted significantly. It is a standard error to overuse XPath locators with both Appium and Selenium web drivers, although it is more severe with Appium.
   This is because Google and Apple need to be more natively supported by XML- and XPath-type searches. This compels Appium to execute many costly calls behind the scenes, enabling XPath’s reliable element discovery.
   So, although XPath is one option, there are other superior locator schemes, such as accessibility IDs, that may be used instead.

3. The need to make the app testable.
   Planning for automation in app development is a strategic move that should be made well before writing any code. This may be accomplished by remembering the element’s hooks and unique IDs to complete the application more testable. This strategic strategy would contribute to the success of automated mobile app testing.
   In addition, there should be a focus on the various testing scenarios to avoid the possibility of overlap before beginning the Appium code. Finally, many issues about the dependability of mobile app test automation would be alleviated if the development teams participated in an open discussion forum to determine the correct accessible IDs, labels, and Unique IDs for the application’s parts.

4. Not considering the Application View state
   When beginning to automate your mobile program, Jonathan usually observes that developers need to configure their apps to easily retrieve particular user views and statuses. For instance, you may have ten independent tests of shopping cart functionality for your app, with eight or nine of them following the same processes of signing in and locating products to add to the cart.
   These sorts of duplicate tests are a tremendous waste of time. Instead, you should be able to set an application’s state and instantly launch a script in that state. This is especially important with Appium because mobile emulators and simulators, being as sluggish as they are, may sometimes take considerable time to reach the desired test point.

5. Querying for the Visibility of Every Component
   Performing a query for the visibility of each piece you get will significantly influence the execution duration of your scripts. However, when you do this, you are essentially incurring an additional overhead of calls and time waiting for Appium to do some action whenever you get an element.
   Therefore, you must ensure that you only utilize critical element properties requested lazily in the context of your test code.

6. Assuming native testing is always better
   Some programmers argue that the most reliable mobile app tests can only be obtained using native testing tools. Since neither Google nor Apple plans to introduce new automation technologies, this is poor guidance. For Android, you can use Espresso; for iOS, you can use XCUITest. In cases when reliability is paramount, Appium is the tool of choice because of its emphasis on code stability rather than hardware.
   However, this rule may be broken if your app team prefers to write tests in the mobile SDK language. Appium is a cross-platform solution that may help you reduce time and effort consumption when automating the testing of mobile apps on iOS and Android. You’re leveraging services from Google and Apple to set up your testing and development environments.

7. Ignoring Appium documentation
   Early Appium documentation could have been more user-friendly. Consequently, they were used less often than they were, but the new Appium docs have been fully rebuilt and restructured. The upgraded version includes previously undocumented information on the Appium API reference, client libraries, available drivers, Appium commands, and code examples.
   It is accessible at Appium.io and warrants further look owing to its novelty. Reviewing current versions of Appium doc may assist you in advancing your mobile app test automation journey.

8. Blaming Appium for Being “Slow”
   There may be situations where Appium is slower than expected, and there are also places in Appium codes that do not appear efficient. In some instances, Appium relies on slower technologies than Appium itself; in others, the Appium curators have deliberately decided to use these slower tactics.
   Using XPath, for instance, will make Appium run far more slowly than other methods. How the instrument is utilized affects its effectiveness. Appium is appreciated more for its reliability than for its speed.

Conclusion:)

You can eliminate such mistakes by automating the testing. Integrating your team’s current Appium testing into the HeadSpin automated software testing platform enables you to execute them on any device. Appium supports functional elements of the test on the HeadSpin Platform, while HeadSpin insights facilitate the non-functional parts of the process. Choose an effective tool for that.

Article source: This article was first published at https://www.oflox.com/blog/mistakes-in-appium-mobile-automation-testing/