Difference between Automation Testing & Manual Testing

Hey folks,

I tried to write  some differences between automation and manual testing. If anyone fine any new, then wrote comments so all can get it from once place.

Automation Testing:

Pros of Automation

• Repetitive work is reduced (e.g., running regression tests, re-entering the same test data, and checking against coding standards)
• Greater consistency and repeatability (e.g., tests executed by a tool in the same order with the same frequency, and tests derived from requirements)
• Tools should have compatibility with our development or deployment
• If requirement change continuously then not suitable
• Automated tools are not OS compatible, require huge space on hard disk, ex. quality centre.
• Underestimating the time, cost and effort for the initial introduction of a tool (including training and external expertise)
• Fast,Reliable,Program reuse,Flexible
• Objective assessment (e.g., static measures, coverage)
• Ease of access to information about tests or testing (e.g., statistics and graphs about testprogress, incident rates and performance)
• Underestimating the time and effort needed to achieve significant and continuing benefits from the tool (including the need for changes in the testing process and continuous improvement of the way the tool is used)
• Underestimating the effort required to maintain the test assets generated by the tool
• Poor response from vendor for support, upgrades, and defect fixes
• Unforeseen, such as the inability to support a new platform
• Risk of suspension of open-source / free tool project.

Cons of Automation

• It costs more to automate. 
•  Writing the test cases and writing or configuring the automate framework you’re using costs more initially than running the test manually.
• Can’t automate visual references, for example, if you can’t tell the font color via code or the automation tool, it is a manual test.

Manual Testing:

Pros of Manual

• If the test case only runs twice a coding milestone, it most likely should be a manual test.  Less cost than automating it.
• It allows the tester to perform more ad-hoc (random testing).  In my experiences, more bugs are found via ad-hoc than via automation.  And, the more time a tester spends playing with the feature, the greater the odds of finding real user bugs.                                                                                    Cons of Manual Testing
• Need lots of time
• We cannot do some kind of testing manually like performance and load testing
• It is suitable if requirement change continuously.
• Not easy to manage and track of work.