17 ans à aider les entreprises françaises
à choisir le meilleur logiciel

Description de UsableNet AQA

AQA simplifie les tests d'accessibilité manuels et automatisés requis par les WCAG (Web Content Accessibility Guidelines). Utilisez AQA pour trouver, tester et documenter l'accessibilité du contenu de manière plus rapide et avec moins de frais généraux, ce qui permet de gagner du temps et d'améliorer la qualité du contenu accessible aux personnes avec des handicaps.

Avec AQA, vous pouvez effectuer des audits d'accessibilité manuels et des tests automatisés, ajouter une extension Chrome pour les développeurs, intégrer la solution aux DevOps et à des systèmes de cas d'assistance populaires comme JIRA, tester des pages de prototypes et détecter et séparer automatiquement des composants.

Qui utilise UsableNet AQA ?

Toutes les entreprises peuvent utiliser AQA pour gérer des tâches et effectuer des audits, des tests d'accessibilité et le suivi des normes ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act). Les équipes qui utilisent AQA comprennent les équipes de développement, les équipes de contenu, les équipes d'assurance qualité et les équipes de produits.

UsableNet AQA Logiciel - 1
UsableNet AQA Logiciel - 2

UsableNet AQA ne vous convainc pas tout à fait ? Comparer avec une alternative populaire

UsableNet AQA

UsableNet AQA

4,5 (22)
200,00 $US
année
Version gratuite
Version d'essai gratuite
26
3
4,1 (22)
4,5 (22)
4,4 (22)
VS.
À partir de
Types de licence
Fonctionnalités
Intégrations
Facilité d'utilisation
Rapport qualité-prix
Service client
36,66 $US
mois
Version gratuite
Version d'essai gratuite
83
9
3,9 (105)
4,4 (105)
4,4 (105)
Les jauges horizontales vertes représentent le logiciel le plus apprécié selon la note globale qui lui a été attribuée ainsi que le nombre d'avis.

Alternatives à UsableNet AQA

SpiraTest
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Gestion des tâches
Suivi des problèmes
Tableau de bord
Level Access Platform
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Analyse de contenu
Audits d'accessibilité de site web
Suivi de la conformité
Siteimprove
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Alertes/Notifications
Gestion de la conformité
Surveillance en temps réel
BrowserStack
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Prise en charge de l'exécution parallèle
Test mobile
Tests d'utilisation
Accessible Web
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Gestion des audits
Monitoring
Suivi de la conformité
ZeuZ
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Tests basés sur les exigences
Tests paramétrés
Vérification des scripts de test
Monsido
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Alertes/Notifications
Fonctions pour sites web
Gestion SEO
NetSuite
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Alerte de paiement en double
Compte de résultat
Tableau de bord d'activités
Cority
Fonctionnalités les mieux notées
Gestion de la conformité
Gestion des documents
Tenue des dossiers OSHA

Avis sur UsableNet AQA

Note moyenne

Note globale
4,5
Facilité d'utilisation
4,1
Service client
4,4
Fonctionnalités
4,3
Rapport qualité-prix
4,5

Avis classés par taille de l'entreprise (nombre d'employés)

  • <50
  • 51-200
  • 201-1 000
  • >1 001

Trouver les avis classés par note

5
59%
4
36%
3
5%
Utilisateur vérifié
Utilisateur LinkedIn vérifié
Comptabilité, 10 000+ employés
Temps d'utilisation du logiciel : plus de deux ans
Source de l'avis

Alternatives envisagées précédemment :

AQA is the bees knees

5,0 il y a 2 ans

Commentaires : 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.

Avantages :

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.

Inconvénients :

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.

Heather
Accessibility Lead (R.-U.)
Loisirs, voyage et tourisme, 1 001–5 000 employés
Temps d'utilisation du logiciel : plus d'un an
Source de l'avis

Alternatives envisagées précédemment :

Great value for money

5,0 il y a 3 ans

Commentaires : 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.

Avantages :

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.

Inconvénients :

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!

Rich
Web Development Manager (É.-U.)
Vente au détail, 51–200 employés
Temps d'utilisation du logiciel : plus d'un an
Source de l'avis

CW/DL AQA REview

3,0 il y a 2 ans

Avantages :

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

Inconvénients :

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.

Debra
Debra
Senior Accessibility Engineer (É.-U.)
Utilisateur LinkedIn vérifié
Services et technologies de l'information, 5 001–10 000 employés
Temps d'utilisation du logiciel : 1 à 5 mois
Source de l'avis

Alternatives envisagées précédemment :

Great tool for our team

4,0 il y a 2 ans

Commentaires : 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.

Avantages :

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.

Inconvénients :

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

Anastasiia
Web Designer (Canada)
Logiciels, 201–500 employés
Temps d'utilisation du logiciel : 6 à 12 mois
Source de l'avis

Good software for helping improve website accessibility

4,0 il y a 2 ans

Commentaires : 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.

Avantages :

- 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.

Inconvénients :

- 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