Manual Software Testing vs IT Support - Which one is easier and less stressful?

[TestLink]

I would like to know which one is easier and less stressful to work - Manual Software Testing or IT Support. Also which one is more paid and have career growth prospects?

Any help greatly appreciated.

 

[odyssey06]

I work in the IT industry but have not worked in either role.

I don't see a long term career in Manual Software Testing. The drive in most IT companies is as much as possible, to replace manual testing with automated tests.
It is very expensive for companies if they have to manually test all their software functions every time they make a change.
The growth area is in Automated Test Engineers, who are capable of writing code or scripts, to automate the tests so that they can be executed cheaply, repeatedly and quickly. Employers will likely look for candidates with computer science degrees for such Test Engineer roles.

In relation to ease\stress, I think the workplace\employer will be a more important factor in determining this than the role.

If I was starting out between the two, I would definitely pick IT Support.
Automated Test Engineer would likely have better pay and career prospects than either of the two roles you mention.

 

[Leo]

Agree 100% with Odyssey06, stress levels are 100% a function of the company, group, manager and peers, and those levels can vary greatly from one group to another in the same company.

In terms of career growth, do you know where you would like to progress to?

 

[TestLink]

I am bit old school in taking initiative and learning new technologies, software etc that comes and goes fast in the market. This is in regard to new server class operating systems, configuring switches and routers etc.

I think in this regard manual software testing scores as there is no need for the above, but just learn business process and check and see whether it works. In case there is some thing that doesnt work, just flag it to the software engineers who would rectify the issue.

This is what i think. Please correct me if I am wrong.

 

[NewEdition]

I do agree that companies are looking to automate where possible, but the human eye cannot be replaced by automation.
If you can automate 50% of functionality, you are doing extremely well.

Support is a different kettle of fish.. you may be dealing with usually non-IT users and would need to talk them through solutions. That takes a lot of patience in most cases.

As above, either role can be stressful or not.. it depends on the organisation, culture etc.. support in a bank is a lot different to support in a tech company.

Testing also has wide reaching industries. It could be a website, finance process, an application etc.. all of which require a lot of manual teating despite the automation opportunities.

 

[Leo]

I am bit old school in taking initiative and learning new technologies, software etc that comes and goes fast in the market. ...

I think in this regard manual software testing scores as there is no need for the above, but just learn business process and check and see whether it works.

Whatever you do, never, ever say that in an interview!! If keeping up with the latest technologies isn't something you're interested in, IT may not be a good fit.

Manual testing is very expensive here, not that it's well paid, just expensive relative to the alternatives. Most large organisations have out-sourced it or have their own off-shore teams doing it.

If you can automate 50% of functionality, you are doing extremely well.

I would have thought that's a low target.

 

[thedaddyman]

Sys support all depends on what you are supporting, the nature of the system, your SLA's and whether or not you have on-call, out of hours etc etc. Can you walk away at 5pm on a Friday evening knowing you are not going to get called over the weekend? It is factors like that you need to look at, also are there any refreshes or significant changes planned that will require support?

Testing is becoming more automated, there is a role for managing customers etc. Testing can become stressful if nothing works, if you come under pressure to downgrade faults to allow a project fall forward. Personally, it would bore me to tears

 

[SirMille]

I am bit old school in taking initiative and learning new technologies, software etc that comes and goes fast in the market. This is in regard to new server class operating systems, configuring switches and routers etc.

I think in this regard manual software testing scores as there is no need for the above, but just learn business process and check and see whether it works. In case there is some thing that doesnt work, just flag it to the software engineers who would rectify the issue.

This is what i think. Please correct me if I am wrong.

It really depends on the company. If you work as QA in a telecommunications company, knowledge of configuring switches and routers is mandatory.
But if you work in a bank, knowledge of highly complex end to end business processes/flows might be required, so significantly less technical, but still intellectually challenging.

If you want to attract a low salary, not learning is the way to go, its what some refer to as the monkey-monkey-banana type tester, and your job be off-shored is a constant risk.
If you become an expert in your domain, be it telecommunications, insurance or crypto, they will throw money at you.