Big props to them on their launch.
http://www.webpagetest.org/ provides that feature (for IE 7/8), I have been using it frequently.
EDIT: Found the right link, sorry for the confusion.
I don't ask to go elsewhere, I ask because coincidentally I decided this morning was the day for me to find a better solution to all the crap I've been tolerating for so long in my cross-browser compatibility work. Mogo was the absolute quickest to impress me and I'm curious if I've misevaluated the lot of them, or if I'm so trained to adore anything referred from HN. I need some perspective.
nirvdrum, care to compare lists of "Web Testing" tools?
- browsershots.org: Free option (go to the back of the line), paid option (priority), but ultimately screenshots only.
- Adobe Browserlab: Pricing not defined? It will be pay, but I don't think they've announced pricing. Single page only results. Just does screenshot comparisons.
- Litmus App: I'm not sure if they're completely out of the space. They've been focusing on email render testing. Single page only results, but pretty slick UI.
- browsera: Does some of the cross-browser issue detection (we'll be adding this soon, but it's not there yet), but feels clunky to use. Limited browser selection, but they said they're working on that. Doesn't do the general site issue detection we do.
Sorry if that was an oversimplification. I'm not trying to misrepresent what the others are doing. Some do some things better than us now, but we're moving pretty quickly on our product, which we think is better in other ways. Primarily, we're amongst the fastest and easiest to set up & use.
Most of what I want to test is internal and I don't have the political clout/intestinal fortitude to get it exposed enough for SL to see it.
But yanking this thread back to being about mogotest... Congrats on the launch, guys!
Nirvdrum, have you heard anyone else express that concern?
The other half to your lead-in is whether the service really rocks your world. For a lot of people what we provide today is very compelling. Of course, we plan on enhancing things so it rocks other people, too.
If you'd like to discuss more, please email me at kevin at mogotest.com. I'd love to hear more about what you think.
Fortunately, I am not affiliated with your company, so I can afford to be a bit more blunt:
One can spend a lot of time on testing. Time is very valuable. If one's time is worth $45 an hour and you spend more than one lousy extra hour per month to save the cost of this service it is probably a mistake.
Too many services price themselves by telling amateurs what they want to hear instead of charging for the value provided to professionals.
That means professionals from related web industries, enthusiasts and "amateurs" may require a service like Mogotest, but not with the frequency of professional website designers, or at the current, one-size-fits-all subscription price. Just sayin.
A little background on me. Over the past dozen years I've developed hundreds of websites, and I still wouldn't consider myself a "professional website designer". Website design isn't where my expertise or passion lie.
So yeah, nirvdrum, maybe I'm not your market. That's cool.
I wish you luck with Mogotest!