We performed a comparison between Datadog 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."Datadog is constantly adding new features."
"The feature I have found most valuable is when I can reuse existing monitors and alerts for new dashboards."
"It has empowered all our platform engineers with a very powerful and easy to use monitoring system."
"If we have a large load for users using our basic Datadog, it will immediately fire off an alert notifying us either something's wrong or not."
"It has a nice UI."
"Overall, the Data UI and the usability of customer features continue to improve."
"Since we integrated Datadog, we have had increased confidence in the quality of our service, and we had an easier time increasing our delivery velocity."
"Its integration is most valuable because you can integrate it with various service providers such as AWS, .Net, etc."
"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 most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"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."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"I found the documentation can sometimes be confusing."
"We primarily use the log management functionality, and the only feedback I have there is better fuzzy text searching in logs (the kind that Kibana has)."
"We have asked technical support questions, and sometimes they don't get back to us right away. Or when they do, it is not the right answer."
"The product could do better with its notifications."
"Lately, chat support has a longer waiting time."
"The Log Explorer could be better. I don't think it has log manipulation as Splunk does."
"While I like the ease of use, when compared with Tenable Nessus they could still improve their usability."
"They need to implement template variables into the message response body."
"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."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"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."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
Datadog is ranked 1st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 137 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". 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". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Datadog 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.