UsableNet AQA

Great tool for our team

Comments: Still ramping up - but I am excited to use this tool to automate processes and bring all teams into compliance using a single tool to report and manage accessibility.

Pros:

We were able to deploy an internal instance to test products on our internal servers. We can also use the browser extension for quick tests.

Cons:

We had some issues deploying the internal instance - but the team is very responsive and helpful.

Alternatives Considered: Level Access Platform

Reasons for Switching to UsableNet AQA: It had more features that our product teams need, and it integrates with JIRA

Great value for money

Comments: Working with UsableNet, we're now able to measure and track the accessibility of our web products, and for the first time ever, report an accessibility score on our Engineering Scorecard, alongside other important metrics like performance and security. The UsableNet team are also great to work with, always responding to queries quickly and in a very helpful way.

Pros:

AQA allows us to carry out accessibility audits of our web platforms pretty painlessly. I love how it steps you through the manual checks and also shows you visually exactly where errors appear on the page. Having the 'auto only' options is great too. The reporting options are excellent, particularly the one for stakeholders showing an overall accessibility score and a summary of issues, and the one for dev teams with links into the tool for every issue. It's also really helpful to see the issues shown on a complexity/severity chart – super useful.

Cons:

There are some elements we feel could be improved, which the team at UsableNet are always interested in hearing about and will work on improvements if they can. It would also be great if we could run our own tests on native apps, but I know this is a little more tricky!

Alternatives Considered: Level Access Platform and Siteimprove

Reasons for Switching to UsableNet AQA: It allows us to test specific user flows and single elements on a page, which is important to us. We also like the UI and find it easy to use. It's also really good value for money.

CW/DL AQA REview

Pros:

It is potentially critical to our organization becoming ADA compliant and avoiding any lawsuits

Cons:

It is not the most user-friendly - the explanation of certain things which are reported is not always clear and sometimes can be downright confusing and frustrating. Additional clarity on certain elements would go a long way towards improving users' satisfaction with the software.

AQA is the bees knees

Comments: I've used AQA on several projects and the team has been incredibly responsive to requests and feedback. They improve the tool regularly and take users' feedback to heart. Compared to other similar platforms they are reasonably priced and provide many in-depth reporting options for stakeholders through development teams. Highly recommend.

Pros:

AQA is an easy-to-learn tool that allows for quicker auditing, manual testing, and defect creation. It integrates with JIRA easily and now has the ability to test emails and documents. Using AQA has saved a considerable amount of time compared to documenting defects on a spreadsheet and creating defects manually. It has been a game-changer for the projects I have worked on.

Cons:

Integrating with some platforms who don't use traditional code can be tricky. The team has been great about finding work-arounds. The downfall is we have needed the AQA tech team to customize the platform for us in order to adequately test the platform our client is using.

Alternatives Considered: Level Access Platform

Reasons for Switching to UsableNet AQA: Pricing and easy of use.

Good software for helping improve website accessibility

Comments: Overall, good product but some improvements should be done. I like that it helped us greatly to improve accessibility on our site and the team is helpful when questions arise.

Pros:

- Very clear difference between automatic issues and issues that can be manually determined to be fixed or not. - Liked the rating of issues from easy to hard fix and their priority/impact. - Having sessions with the AQA team was valuable when we had questions/concerns. The team is very nice and helpful, they try their best to give personalized advice, however, beware that a lot depends on the quality of your website's code and your resources to fix it. - I loved the report exporting feature and that I was able to download the spreadsheet with all issues on all pages that were tested. I used the spreadsheet way more than the access to projects/tests via AQA itself. Spreadsheets are more intuitive.

Cons:

- There has been a lot of confusion between "tests" and "audits" for our team. We still do not see much difference between the two and do not understand why there has to be both when they do look identical and offer identical information upon the analysis. In audits, it's even harder to find access to the issues Review page. I also don't understand why I can run a new test but cannot run a new audit. There are no quick tooltips or anything like that to explain the feature. - I think there has to be a lot of work done across the platform in terms of wording. I spent a lot of time understanding how to download an excel spreadsheet with the test results. It says "run the report" (or something of this sort). Why not say "download the report" instead? It's more straightforward. - There is no way to leave a comment on the platform to the commenter from the AQA team directly. I used Jira to communicate with the AQA team and ask questions there, which does take additional time of yours, however, I like how I could share screenshots and format text there for more clarity. - There's a chat feature that my team never used. I think unless there's a possibility to chat with AQA's team via this chat, it is not really helpful. - In this exact review survey, they are asking to rate some of the features I've never even seen or heard of. I tried googling them and no results. It's hard to understand what they are talking about if there's no consistency in wording across all touchpoints

Its THE option

Comments: necessary but not easy or with proper support

Pros:

It is the best accessibility option for the price in terms of improving your site, learning, and avoiding lawsuits

Cons:

the support offered was not technical enough when i would ask questions...there should be standing meetings or quick turnaround on questions. the responses should not create an entire email chain of questions, it should be a solid response the first time with advice/action WAYYYYY too much manual effort and time to go through a scan. nothing is saved from scan to scan so you never can reduce this time. scan recommendations and descriptions are weak and necessitate that you already have an expert understanding of accessibility or you will need to read dry, long WCAG guidelines from the WCAG site, not usable net

A Perfect Way to Communicate Accessibility with Stakeholders

Comments: UsableNet AQA has helped us to eliminate thousands of violations over time and has allowed us to put a framework in place to prevent new violations from appearing in the future. Overall, I'm very satisfied with the software.

Pros:

What I like most about UsableNet AQA is that it makes it easy to get the team - technological members and non-technological members - aligned on a standardization for ADA compliance, as well as actionable goals to work towards.

Cons:

What I like least about UsableNet AQA is the fact that it is just so robust. It's actually a good thing, but sometimes, I find myself lost in the UI because there are so many features involved.

AQA + Revolve

Comments: UsableNet AQA had a very detailed description of the issue that included a screen shot so we can find what they are on our end fairly easily. We thought that some of the suggestions to resolve made sense but for those issues that we had questions on, it became a roadblock. Our overall experience with UsableNet AQA has been fair. We would require more resources to move as fast as we'd like. We're looking forward to using AQA to continue remediating the issues.

Pros:

After a year into our project with AQA, I don't feel we would have gotten this far without the JIRA integration and the ability to create tickets based on the issues found. Managing the volume of issues with ease has been very helpful for us.

Cons:

I feel we could have benefit more from real time communication on the software itself. In the event our team had any questions, the comment section didn't lend itself to any direct communication with the UsableNet team to resolve issues as quickly as we liked, especially for more technical heavy suggestions.

Best Software for Accessibility & Compliance for Websites

Pros:

Ease of Use On the fly report generation Detailed Feedback on compliance issues

Cons:

ease of use should be extended for Mobile /Tablet and other devices as well

Have been using AQA from last 2 years

Comments: This helps us to make our effort more productive and right direction. We keep running web accessibility reports on our site to fix the structure and conetent issue.

Pros:

Web accessibility audit and identifying the content issue is very easy with UsableNet AQA. We could easily run the report on single or multiple pages and identify the issues. UsableNet also provides some tips for fixing the content issue that is really helpful.

Cons:

Nothing. Everything I found helpful and there are so many things that I learned regarding web accessibility using UsableNet AQA.

Usablenet Review

Comments: Overall the tool is very user accessible

Pros:

The test coverage against WCAG guidelines and Section 508 standards is on a broader scope.

Cons:

reporting parameters are not as comfortable as other tools

UsableNet AQA for ADA compliance

Pros:

Any feature that required for staying ADA compliant is present in UsableNet AQA.

Cons:

It is a little bit hard to use the features of UsableNet AQA in full capacity.

The best tool for a difficult job

Pros:

Our initial site audit has been the roadmap for ADA mediation. The feedback and WCAG references it provides give a clear indication of the criteria needed to provide all users an appropriate site experience. We're comfortable reanalyzing pages or site areas when content/layouts get broad updates, and for new content areas. I also appreciate the ease by which the AQA Chrome plug-in enables testing/retesting of our web pages. It allows us to easily test ideas in real-time using Chrome's developer tools with the plug-in.

Cons:

Occasionally, some of the feedback is redundant, but the redundancy makes sense and is easily overcome. Rarely, the feedback from the tool is generic, but UsableNet provides clear interpretations when needed.

UsableNet is great for handling our ADA Compliance Needs!

Pros:

Its so easy to onboard new users to this product

Cons:

There could be some better third-party support tools

A great tool for accessibility

Pros:

I love the ease at which the AQA tool reviews the DOM and the accurate descriptions of what needs to be fixed and how to fix it.

Cons:

Last I checked there was only a chrome plugin; would love to use in other browsers as well.

Great accessible software

Comments: SHow all the errors at different levels so you what is crirtal first & you can work your way doen to the low impacts

Pros:

Its easy to use. Reports are easy to read & I can pass of any details to our developers to fix backen issues.

Cons:

Nothing that I can think of at this time.

Website Reviews

Pros:

Can easily find what type of things a webpage needs to have to be ADA Compliant.

Cons:

Some checks are repetitive when reviewing multiple pages for a site.

Must have for ADA work on website

Comments: Good experience

Pros:

Ease of use, and detailed testing capabilities

Cons:

description of issues are not always clear

Consideartions

Pros:

The amount of testing that can be done using the program

Cons:

The dashboard is not very simple and user friendly to use, the test script should be more navigable and the waiting for reload the test every time I open it is a bit annoying

UsablNet Review

Comments: It is a great tool

Pros:

Complrehensive features to monitor, analyze & track accessibility issues

Cons:

It requires extensive trainng to undersatnd the usage of the tool

Love it

Pros:

Comprehensive feature set that all ties together nicely

Cons:

A little bit of a learning curve when first getting started

useable

Pros:

Going through first time wasn't easy to understand but once you do its quite easy

Cons:

UI could be nicer and more modern as just looks very basic