We performed a comparison between AWS Auto Scaling and VMware Aria Operations for Applications based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"The tool gives you the flexibility to scale up and grow. The solution is also fast to deploy."
"It efficiently handles traffic, ensuring we are not running expenses and the infrastructure is strong enough to handle the load."
"Our internal business applications are hosted in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. When it reaches seventy percent, it sends me an email notification."
"The product provides self-healing features."
"When a lot of traffic comes into our organization, the product scales our instances based on our environment’s requirements."
"The solution's monitoring effectively monitors our application and CPU utilization."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"No issues with stability."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"People are very pleased with the implementation."
"For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"The billing and cost optimization of the solution could be improved."
"It could be cheaper."
"The tool must include AI features."
"Flexibility in configuring the workload is missing in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The solution's infrastructure scalability and elasticity could be improved."
"The solution must improve automation."
"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"It has latency issues. It depends on the distribution used, whether it's Amazon Linux, Windows Linux, etc. Occasionally, there are latency issues, which might lead to slower performance."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
"In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Auto Scaling is ranked 15th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 18 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 9 reviews. AWS Auto Scaling is rated 8.8, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AWS Auto Scaling writes "The product helps reduce costs and avoids interruptions to the customer experience". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". AWS Auto Scaling is most compared with , whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Dynatrace, Grafana, Zabbix, Datadog and AppDynamics. See our AWS Auto Scaling vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.