Why we simply must reduce software errors

In a world where consumers are presented with an ever-expanding number of choices about the products and services they make use of, quality matters like never before. Products that fail to work as promised are quickly discarded and, even if these problems are fixed at a later date, a legacy of bad reviews can prevent even the best products from gaining a foothold on the market.
Why we simply must reduce software errors

Image Credit


Although software users are generally accepting of security updates that need to be applied to packages to address the discovery of new exploits, the same is not true of updates that simply fix bugs that have been discovered since the software was released. From IT managers to everyday users downloading apps onto their smartphones, all consumers will eventually get frustrated with software that fails to do what it should and will look for alternatives.

Extensive testing throughout development can help to avoid this scenario, but doing so using an in-house team can be extremely slow. Automated software testing solutions are a possible alternative, but are generally only of limited use. Although they can be extremely efficient in some scenarios, they cannot be used to test certain elements, such as visual considerations.


One quick and easy way to ensure that software is as bug-free as possible it to make use of a crowdsourced testing service such as http://www.mytesters.com. With tens of thousands of skilled, professional testers available at any time of day or year, your software can be checked on a wide range of platforms in many more environments and scenarios than it would be possible to create in-house. With multiple, simultaneous tests taking place, end results are achieved far more quickly, reducing the time needed for this phase of development.

Crowdsourced testing also gets round the fact that manual testing can be repetitive and dull when carried out by a small number of workers. This can lead to a lack of engagement, meaning that errors are more easily missed. By having a larger number of testers, each working for a limited amount of time, this problem is eliminated.

Manual testing is also far more flexible. Unlike automated tests, which have to be set up and designed in response to identified issues, manual testing allows such issues to be addressed immediately.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.