We performed a comparison between ManageEngine Applications Manager 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 feature that I have found most valuable in ManageEngine Applications Manager is its dashboard."
"I am impressed with the tool's reporting feature which is simple."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to be able to monitor Kubernetes."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager's installation is pretty easy."
"ITSM is a valuable feature, it complies with the requirements in Pakistan."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager maintains the historical data and it's easy for us to analyze the trends and patterns and fix them accordingly."
"We do not have pricing constraints as an organization, because we do have reservations about ManageEngine being functionally scalable."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ease of use."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"An area for improvement in ManageEngine Applications Manager is artificial intelligence. If AI is integrated into the solution, it'll be a piece of cake. Currently, it's all configured manually."
"The agent often crashes when there is too much load on the application side. If a sudden storm of data comes in, the agent crashes down most of the time."
"I would like the solution to improve the ability to track services."
"The problem is that implementation requires a significant amount of mapping effort."
"One area of improvement is the dashboard should be more readable and available."
"The dashboards in the interface need a lot of work."
"The information provided by ManageEngine is not deep-dive like IBM and CA provide."
"They can improve the post-processing of the data. AppDynamics has more powerful tools for post-processing or analytics. It has some limitations in more complex environments, but because we are free to use different solutions, we try to find what is best for the customers or the problem we are trying to solve."
"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."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
More ManageEngine Applications Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine Applications Manager is ranked 36th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 15 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. ManageEngine Applications Manager is rated 7.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of ManageEngine Applications Manager writes "Though it is a useful tool for the modernization and monitoring of applications, it lacks in providing stability and scalability". 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". ManageEngine Applications Manager is most compared with AppDynamics, Grafana, Dynatrace, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor and Prometheus, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our ManageEngine Applications Manager 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.