Explore all our content

Dive into our back catalogue of content. With over 2000 pieces of content to digest, there will definitely be some software testing content of interest to you.

Displaying contents 1711 - 1740 of 6148 in total

Searching...

MoT Certifications vs ISTQB
MoT Certifications vs ISTQB 💼 ISTQB Certifications 1️⃣ Traditional: A long-standing certification path 2️⃣ Theory-Heavy: Focuses on term...
A comparison table titled "MoT Professional Membership vs LinkedIn Learning and Pluralsight." It contrasts key aspects of the two offerings across categories like focus, content quality, relevance, community, format, instructors, trends, learning style, and professional development. The MoT column highlights strengths such as deep focus on software testing, practitioner-led content, active community, modern relevance, flexible learning formats, real-time insights, and respected career development. In contrast, the LinkedIn Learning and Pluralsight column describes a more generic, outdated, passive, and isolated learning experience with no community involvement.
One of the biggest reasons people come for MoT Professional Membership is that places like LinkedIn Learning and Pluralsight just don't s...
What if...? in a speech bubble by Bug
We're ramping up to TestBash in a couple of months! Whoop! And we're in the mood to give a ticket to one lucky person who can share a te...
Non conventional techniques
Guruprasad B Gopinath
Guruprasad B Gopinath
Is all about using non conventional techniques in a red ocean. Some of the best sources are: Conversations, Informal ones Social media po...
RCRCRC heuristic by Karen N. Johnson helps identify areas that need testing when software changes:

Recent - What testing around new areas of code should I think about?

Core - What essential functions or features must continue to work?

Risky - What features or areas of code are inherently more risky?

Configuration Sensitive - What code is dependent on environment settings?

Repaired - What code has changed to address defects and potentially created issues?

Chronic - What code typically breaks features that need to be tested?
RCRCRC is a regression testing heuristic developed by Karen Johnson that helps identify areas that need testing when software changes. R...
Rachel Kibler: Engineering hope image
Learn how clearer expectations and team support are creating hope and direction for quality careers
A screenshot of the MoT Job Board page.
We've made updates to our job board it's designed for the community to share software testing and quality engineering jobs they find, rat...
Photo on the left is on hands writing tests on a laptop looking health - photo on the right is muscly huge hands pumped from writing prompts when writing tests.
Quality engineers before vs after AI Promps started being used,any one else feel like they are turning into authors as well as testers wi...
Free, Pro, or Thinking Models: Testers LLM Trends - 2025 image
Not every large language model (LLM) is built the same, and not every tester needs the same models.
Why do we assume complex problems have simple, universal solutions?

Sure — sometimes simple is enough. But when we’re dealing with a variety of challenges across different teams, projects, and contexts, it’s unrealistic to expect one magic fix.

I saw a post recently claiming that the key to solving Quality Engineering issues is to “start testing earlier.” The idea is sound — shift left is a solid practice. 

But is it always the most important thing? 
Not necessarily.

In some teams, the bigger issue is communication between product, development, and QA. Testing earlier won’t help much if the handoffs are broken. Wouldn’t it make more sense to start by aligning on how the teams actually work together?

In others, the problem is prioritization — bugs that were known before release get rediscovered by users, creating unnecessary fire drills. The issue isn’t when they test, it’s how they handle what they already know.

And some teams are simply releasing too fast, cutting corners on quality and spending more time cleaning up avoidable messes. Testing early won’t help if there’s no time or process to act on the results.

Bottom line: shift left is great, but it’s not a universal cure.

Start by identifying your team’s biggest pain point. Solve that. Then move on to the next.

We all want silver bullets, but complex systems rarely work that way. Not everything is a nail — and a good toolbox needs more than just hammers.

Look at yourself… Taking your vitamins is healthy. 
But don’t expect them to fix everything if you’re still sitting all day testing code without getting up to move once in a while.
I like what Joel says here. We can talk about 'best' or 'good' practice. Or good ideas on how to do things. Yes it's probably better to...
Security lapses as a way to inject fear image
Build sources of truth into our communication systems
OWASP Top Ten logo with those words and a wasp in a circle.
A01:2021-Broken Access Control moves up from the fifth position; 94% of applications were tested for some form of broken access control. ...
Subscribe to our newsletter
We'll keep you up to date on all the testing trends.