We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and OpenText SiteScope 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 tools for logs and metrics are pretty good and easy to use."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"I use the solution to monitor the infrastructure and applications."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"The upside to the solution is if you are working in a Microsoft or Azure environment, it makes things easier."
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"The biggest one is probably just the user interface. There could be more advanced logging at the database level. They can also improve their query builder to allow you to search for things better, but I last used it about a year ago. They might have already changed a ton of things in the newer versions."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"I need connectivity with cost management."
"As a younger product it still has room for feature improvement and enhancement."
"This solution has fewer features than some of its competitors, so adding more features to it would make it better."
"We encounter some difficulties in monitoring the operating system on its own."
"Azure Monitor could improve the visualization aspect and integrate better with other third-party services."
"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 45 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and Grafana, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics and Prometheus. See our Azure Monitor vs. OpenText SiteScope 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.