Hello there!
I’m currently grappling with our mobile testing strategy. It particularly concerns the choice of automation frameworks.
I’ve worked extensively with Appium. I’ve faced consistent issues with test flakiness, slow execution, and unpredictable failures. This occurs even without any changes to the app or environment.
While Appium offers the clear advantage of cross-platform testing and code reuse, its local setup is undeniably time-consuming. Debugging can also be a major hurdle.
I’ve heard that native frameworks like Espresso and XCUITest are significantly faster. They also appear far more stable.
This has led to a crucial question. In the debate of Appium vs Espresso vs XCUITest, is the reliability and speed of the native frameworks truly worth the extra overhead of maintaining them separately?
I’m in a position to influence our tech stack. I’m keen to hear from those who’ve used any of these tools in production. Did switching to native frameworks genuinely improve your CI stability and test reliability? Or did the maintenance costs ultimately outweigh the benefits?
Any real-world experiences or insights would be invaluable.
Hello @sakshikuchroo! Your dilemma with Appium versus native frameworks like Espresso and XCUITest is very relatable. I was in the exact same spot myself, deep into Appium, dealing with flaky tests and mysterious failures, especially in CI.
We eventually made the switch to Espresso for Android and XCUITest for iOS. Honestly, the change was night and day.
Test execution times dropped drastically, going from 10–15 minutes down to a consistent 3–5 minutes. Our flakiness rate plummeted by over 80%.
Sure, managing two separate codebases for Android and iOS did add some overhead. However, we found it much easier to isolate platform-specific issues. Most importantly, we gained immense confidence in our test pipeline and overall test reliability.
If your team has the bandwidth and the long-term vision, I’d absolutely say native is definitely worth the investment.
Hope this first hand experience helps inform your decision! 
Hi @panchal_archanaa and @sakshikuchroo! The deep dive into Appium versus native frameworks is a journey many mobile testers have undertaken. I certainly stuck with Appium longer than I should have, mostly due to the promise of cross-platform tests.
But in reality, maintaining those tests consistently across both platforms quickly became its own complex problem. Eventually, we made the strategic decision to migrate to Espresso and XCUITest.
Was it more work upfront? Yeah, definitely. However, the tests integrated far better with the actual applications, ran significantly faster, and gave us much more reliable signals in CI.
Also, debugging became easier since the stack traces were cleaner and better documented. That said, if your team is small, splitting frameworks might genuinely stretch your resources. So, weigh that carefully against your team’s size and capacity.
Hope this firsthand experience helps you navigate your framework decision! This is a big one!
Hello @sakshikuchroo and fellow mobile testing strategists! The question about Appium versus native frameworks is truly insightful, and I can share a relevant experience.
Funny enough, we adopted a hybrid setup in production for a while. This involved using Appium for our cross-platform E2E flows. We then used Espresso and XCUITest for critical smoke and integration tests.
This approach gave us a valuable balance. We didn’t have to fully abandon Appium’s code reuse benefits. Yet, we still relied on native tools for crucial stability in CI.
The native tests were blazing fast and rarely failed without a clear, real reason. We wrote thin wrappers to standardize assertions, which helped significantly reduce the overall maintenance pain.
So, you don’t necessarily have to go all-in on native. This is especially true unless your Appium flakiness is seriously blocking releases.
Hope this nuanced approach helps you refine your strategy!