Mobile Application Testing

By Waqar Ahmad
Swaam Tech (Pvt) Ltd
Contact us: info@swaam.com for Ur App Testing

Note: The slide was presented in the Software Testing Course at NUCES-FAST Lhr

Classification of Mobile Applications
 Web Applications
 Could be Simple Markup (WML , HTML, XHTML,
XHTML MP) or AJAX Applications
 A Web Application may be Designed for
 A Single Type of Device or
 Multiple Different Devices with Customization for each
Device (or each Family of Devices)
 Multiple Different Devices—A Transcoder/Proxy Residing
Between Web Application Server and Device Transforms
Content based on Device User-Agent Capabilities

Classification of Mobile Applications
 On-Device Applications May be
 Developed for Better Portability
 Java ME
 FlashLite
 Native Platform Applications
 IPhone: Objective C
 Symbian: C/C++
 Windows Mobile: .Net CF
 Android : Java for Application and C/C++ for Low Level

Mobile App Testing—Challenges
 Device Fragmentation is a Big Challenge
 Devices Vary in Screen Size, Memory, Processing
Power, Hardware Features etc.
 Apple iPhone is Least Fragmented among All Mobile
Platforms
 Testing on All Target Handset/Devices
 Almost Impractical if Number of Target Handsets is Large
 Testing on All Target Operator Networks
 Almost Impractical if Number of Target Operators is Large
 Network Operator may Impose Certain Constraints

 Device Vendor (Not Necessarily Manufacturer) may
Customize a Device
 Changes may be Done in Both User Interface and
Functionality
 Many a Times Changes are Not Well-Documented
 Device is Not the Same as Released by Manufacturer
 Testing on All Versions of Operating System
 In Many Situations, it May Not be Possible to Upgrade the
Device to New OS Version
 Same Device Models may have Multiple OS Configurations
based on Target Market Requirements
 Localization
 Hundreds of Devices with Many Variants of Each Device

 Testing in All Web Browsers
 Browsers Significantly Vary Across Devices
 May Support HTML, xHTML, WML, AJAX
 Web Content Transcoders
 Web Content may be Transformed to Meet User-Agent
Constraints
 Transcoder may Not Respect User Experience Factors in
some Situations

 Inconsistencies in Specification Implementations
 Each Vendor is Responsible for Java ME Specifications
Implementations
 Implementations may Not be Consistent across Devices and
Vendors
 Performance Measurement
 Extremely Difficult to Benchmark Performance due to Highly
Fragmented Market
 Detection of Display Issues
 Human Involvement is Must
 Generally it is Not Possible to Purchase All Target Handsets
due to Financial Constraints

 Application Usability Testing
 End Users may Not even be Skilled at Using a Mobile
Device
 End User may Use Application in Multiple Contexts
 Driving in Rush Hour
 Walking in Crowded Market
 Multiple Input / Output Modalities
 Diverse User Interface Styles
 In Reality, A Testing Lab Cannot Simulate all Possible
End User Contexts

 Development and Deployment Platforms are Different
 Development Platforms
 Windows, Linux
 Deployment Platforms
 iPhone, Symbian, Android, Blackberry, Windows Mobile
 Emulators Do Not Capture All the Characteristics of a
Device
 Multiple Design Specifications may be Required for
Single Application due to Device Fragmentation—
Requires Test Cases Accordingly

Testing Techniques: General
Gather Useful Data
 Decide Target Handsets as Early as Possible in
Development Lifecycle (Better in Requirements Analysis
Phase)
 Document Incompatibilities in Devices e.g. Differences in
 Installation Processes
 Audio/Video Capabilities
 Memory, Processing Power, Screen Size etc.
 Document Device Software (Firmware) Limitations
 ‘Bugs in Firmware’ are Not Unusual
 Document Device Web Browser Constraints
 Supported Version of HTML
 AJAX Supported or Not

Gather Useful Data
 Better Acquire Meta Data of All Target Handsets from an
External Source
 Extensive Databases Containing Device Meta Data
 WURFL—An Open Source XML Database of Device Characteristics

 DeviceAtlas—A Proprietary Database of Device Characteristics

 Some Websites can Capture and Return HTTP Headers
 For instance, Access the Website using a Phone, Website will Return
Headers in HTTP Requests
 Useful when Data is Not Available in Databases and also to Verify
Already Available Data in Meta Data Source
 A Development House may also Maintain an Internal
Database Containing Data Not Available Otherwise

Classify Devices

 Classify Devices
 Category—1: All Devices that Support XHTML
 Category—2: All Devices that Support AJAX
 Category—3: All Devices that Support Java ME
 Pick Representative Device(s) from each Category for
Testing Purposes
 Prepare Test Cases based on Data Gathered about
Target Handsets

Perform Testing on Real Devices

 Start Testing on Real Devices as Early as Possible
 There is No Good Alternative to a Real Device for
Testing

Emulator is Useful but is Not a Real Device
 Testing on Emulators
 An Emulator is a Software Application that Imitates a Smartphlone
 A Device Emulator may be Used to Test Application on Desktop
 Some Emulators Emulate General Characteristics of a Platform (like
Java ME Emulator)
 Some Emulator Emulate Relatively Faithful Representation of Specific
Phones (BlackBerry Dev Kits)
 Emulator may or may Not Require Compilation for Target Platform
 Single Compiled Code for both Emulator and Target Devices
 Java ME
 Windows Mobile
 Different Compilers for Compilation for Symbian Emulator and Target ARM
Device
 Useful for Quick Testing in Development Environment
 Emulators are Not Real Devices
 Testing on Emulator does Not Guarantee Application Success on Real Device

Application UI Should Preferably be Consistent with
Device UI Style

 Test Application User Interface Consistency with
Device Interface Style
 Is the Application User Interface Consistent with User
Interface of Underlying Device Applications?
 Does the Application Offer Interaction Mechanism
Similar to Interaction Mechanism Generally
Implemented in Native Device Applications?
 Softkey Mapping
 Look&feel

Different Test Cases are Required to Cater Diverse
Input / Output Modalities
 Perform Testing for Various Input Modalities
 Touch Screen
 Testing with Single and Multiple Touch Input
 Testing with Virtual Keyboard
 Trackball/Track Wheel
 Numeric Keypad
 QWERTY Keypad
 4- or 5-Way Navigator
 Perform Testing for Various Output Modalities
 Different Screen Sizes

Test Applications in Real User-Contexts
 Test the Application in Relevant User Contexts
 User Context Involves User, Application and
Surroundings
 Design Various User Interaction Scenarios in Applicable
Contexts (user driving in rush hour, walking, in
classroom etc.)
 Test Applications in Real Contexts

Mobile Ecosystem Requirements must be Addressed
 Application are Generally Launched through Various
Application Stores (Mobile Ecosystem)
 Apple App Store, Nokia Ovi, Blackberry AppWorld, Android
Market, GetJar, Handango etc.
 Test Applications to Meet Requirements of various
Ecosystem Stakeholders
 Manufacturers/Vendors
 UI Guidelines from Apple for Iphone Applications
 Symbian Signed
 Operators
 Operators may also have some Requirements
 Third Parties
 Java Verified Process

Testing Techniques: Web Applications
Rules-Based Testing
 Rules-Based Testing with User-Agent Impersonation
 Create Testing Rules based on
 Device Capabilities
 Known Bugs in the Device
 Device Data in Data Sources (like WURFL, Internal Database)
 Application Requirements
 Test Cases are Written that Checks HTTP Response for Targeted
Content
 Impersonate a Device and Communicate with Web Server
 Change HTTP Headers like
 Accept: image/gif, image/jpeg
 User-Agent: ‘NokiaN95…….+Profile/MIDP-2.1 + …..’

 Check the Server Response Against Rules and Identify
Discrepancies, if any

Rules-Based Testing

 Rules-Based Tests
 Testing is Automated for Multiple Types of User-Agents
 Testing can be Done Using
 An HTTP Library for Sending Requests and Receiving
Response
 Web Browser (FireFox, Safari, Internet Explorer)
 Useful to View the Rendered Screen with some Limitations

 Rules Based Testing is Useful for Automated Testing of
 Web Applications that Deliver Content on Phone
 Regression Testing
 Web Content Accessibility

Transcoder Behavior must be Thoroughly Tested
 Transcoder Behavior
 Web Content may be Transformed by a Transcoder to
Meet User-Agent Constraints
 A Transcoder Resides Between User-Agent and Web
Server
 Cookies should Not be Shared
 Use Automated Tests for Communicating with Server in
Parallel
 User Experience Should Not be Affected
 Manual Testing—See and Record the Behavior

W3C mobileOK Standard

 W3C has Defined mobileOK Tests
 Tests for Checking Mobile Readiness (W3C Best
Practices) of a Website
 http://www.w3.org/TR/mobileOK-basic10-tests/

 W3C mobileOK Checker
 Performs mobileOK Tests on a Web Page to Determine
its level of Mobile-Friendliness
 http://validator.w3.org/mobile/

Testing Techniques: On-Device Applications
Unit Testing and On-Device Debugging

 Unit Testing Frameworks Exist for almost All
Platforms
 GUI Layer, Event Handling and System Testing is Not
Possible
 On-Device Debugging is Available on Most of the
Platforms

Custom Test Applications may Reveal Major Issues
 Custom Test Applications
 Can be Used to Test Critical Aspects
 Whether an Application has Access to Device File System
 Performance of Device Database System
 Write Applications to Diagnose Key Issues
e.g., Develop an Application that Helps in Testing
When
 Lot of Free Memory is Available on Device
 Very Limited Memory is Available on Device

Network Availability and Bandwidth
 Perform Application Testing in Different Network
Signal Strengths
 No Network
 Intermittent Connectivity
 Strong Network Signals Presence
 Application Testing May be Required in Various
Network Types
 2G, 3G

External Events may Affect Application Behavior

 Test Application against Events that may Occur during
Application Installation and Execution
 Phone Call Received
 SMS Received
 Battery Removed
 Device Switched Off
 Bluetooth Device Requested to Contact

Combine ‘Automated Input’ with ‘Manual Verification’
 Generate Automatic Events
 Key Press
 Pointer Press
 Touch
 Capture Screenshots during Event Generation Process
and Compare them

Track Behavior when App is being Used by Consumers

 Track Application Behavior during Various Lifecycle Stages
when in Production
 Installation
 Execution
 Removal
 Application may Send Important Data to Server that can be
Used to Identify and Fix some Bugs
 Java ME Includes some Parameters for this Purpose
 ‘GetJar ’ Offers Such a Service
 Application can Call Server and Report some Information
 http://www.getjar.com/

Testing Techniques: Commercial
Get Online Services for Devices Not Available In-house
 Testing on Real Devices that Developers Don’t Own
 A Service that Enables Application Testing on Real Devices
 Devices are Located on Remote Servers
 Devices are Connected to Various Operator Networks Worldwide
 Desktop Client Software/ Web Application Enables All Testing
Features Remotely
 Device Acquisition, Cleanup
 Application Installation, Execution, Removal
 Device Shutdown, Battery Removal and Installation

 Service Providers
 DeviceAnywhere (http://www.deviceanywhere.com/)
 Over 2000 Devices Connected to over 30 Worldwide Carrier
Networks across USA, Canada, UK, France, Germany, and Spain
 Perfecto Mobile (http://www.perfectomobile.com/)

Crowdsourcing is also an Option
 CrowdSourcing (Crowd + Outsourcing)
 Testing by Human Testers (Mobsters) Located Worldwide
 If Done Effectively, Real Usability Testing Results can also be
Obtained
 Testing in Real User Contexts is Possible
 How it Works?
 Developers and Testers are Registered with a Third Party Service
Provider
 Third Party Service Provider is Responsible for Coordination of All
Parties Involved in the Process (Application submission, monitoring
tools, results reporting etc.)
 Service Providers
 Mob4Hire (http://www.mob4hire.com/)
 GetJar (http://www.getjar.com/)
 uTest (http://www.utest.com/)

User Feedback is Important
 App Stores may Provide Useful Feedback from End
Users
 User Reported Bugs
 User Reviews on Usability
 User Ratings
 Data is Helpful for
 Quickly Fixing some Bugs
 Future Application Releases

Testing Tools: Web Applications
 HttpUnit
 Unit Testing for Web Applications
 HtmlUnit
 Unit Testing with JavaScript Support
 Urllib
 Provides APIs for Web Access
 Check a Web Application for Mobile Readiness
 mobiReady: http://ready.mobi/launch.jsp?locale=en_EN
 W3C mobileOk Checker:
http://validator.w3.org/mobile/

 User-Agent Capture Tools
 Captures Characteristics of User-Agent
 Content Type, HTML version Supported on Device etc.
 Pycopia: http://www.pycopia.net/webtools/headers
 FireFox and Others Browsers—Use User-Agent
Switcher Add-On. However, there are Some Issues
 Differences in how Desktop and Mobile Browsers Layout
Content may Render Testing Results Unreliable
 Performance Differences in Desktop and Mobile
Browsers
 Feature Differences in Desktop and Mobile Browsers

 Desktop Browser Automation Tools
 WebDriver (http://code.google.com/p/webdriver/)
 Java APIs that can be Integrated with Eclipse
 Selenium (http://seleniumhq.org/)
 Firefox add-on that records clicks, typing, and other actions to
make a test, which can be played back in the browser.
 Selenium RC can be Used in a Desktop Browser with HTTP
Header Emulation
 IPhoneDriver
 A WebDriver based Tool for Testing on UIWebView

Testing Tools: On-Device Applications
 iPhone
 Embedded Browser Component (UIWebView)
 iPhoneUnitTesting
 Memory Sweep (For memory snapshot of iPhone)
 Java ME
 J2MEUnit (For Unit Testing)
 JInjector (For System Testing)
 ASM (To Instrument the Code)

 Android
 Dalvik Debug Monitor Server (DDMS)
 Thread and Heap Information on Device
 Screen Capture on Device
 Incoming Call, SMS, Location Data Spoofing
 Monkey Tool (for Both Simulator and Device)
 Generate Random Streams of User Events Click and Touch

 Windows Mobile
 Hopper
 Simulates Input Stress by Rapidly Sending Keystrokes and
Screen Taps in a Random Fashion

 Symbian
 Bullseye
 Bullseye Coverage is a code coverage analyzer for C++ and C that tells how much
of the application source code was tested. Code coverage analysis is useful during
unit testing, integration testing, and final release.
 EUnitPro
 EUnit Pro enables creation and automation of unit and module tests for Symbian
C++ Software.
 Symbian AnalyseHeap Utility
 This tool analyses the contents of Symbian OS heaps to produce meaningful
representations of their structure and content.
 TRK (Target Resident Kernel)
 Enables On-Device Debugging
 Yucca Tools
 File browsing , Crash Monitor, Supported Fonts Preview, Memory Status etc.

Mobile Application Testing

Recommandé

Recommandé

Contenu connexe

Tendances

Tendances (20)

En vedette

En vedette (8)

Similaire à Mobile Application Testing

Similaire à Mobile Application Testing (20)

Dernier

Dernier (20)

Mobile Application Testing