We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and OpenText Real User Monitoring 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 solution helps us provide a better user experience to our customers."
"I like how the AppDynamics dashboard portrays the information flows. When a task is executed, various flows between different applications and databases happen in the background. The dashboard is intuitive and helps visualize the connections, the directions of the flow, and the information related to these specific sessions."
"It's made it easier to collaborate across teams; be able to have the same data immediately in front of you just by sharing a URL."
"The ability to check parameters for microservice applications is most valuable. It is important for me. I can manually create new business transactions for applications and individually monitor business transactions. I can also use a lot of extensions. It has a lot of extensions to monitor other third-party applications, such as NoSQL applications, memory cache applications, Kafka applications, and Couchbase applications. It is very useful. We are also using the end-user monitoring site to follow all end-user activities. It is important for us to check the errors on the customer site."
"AppDynamics is easy to implement if you follow the documentation, and the documentation that they provide is good."
"Before we moved the code to AppDynamics, we had to compare the agile process and also had to make sure that they're following the standards."
"After we implemented this solution, we can easily determine the root cause of issues."
"After a major incident, root cause analysis is conducted and, most of the time, we understand what caused the incident and how it can be prevented from happening again."
"Very easy to implement."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"The network diagnostics that they are adding will be really useful. They could add more detail into what is going on in the network."
"I think I would like to see a better way to deploy and upgrade the machine agents that we use. Currently, we have to use SCCM, and that might just be our environment with the customer."
"AppDynamics is new to the cloud and could improve its cloud services, they are following a monolithic monitoring approach."
"Their agents sometimes claim to be very lightweight, especially with databases, but they are very heavy. They can take up more compute than the actual work that we need to do."
"The integration with cloud services is still pending with AppDynamics. We would like the product to be serverless."
"The price of the solution could improve."
"If it can be able to intelligently provide all the things we need to look at, from a data point of view, that would be very useful."
"I would like to be able to monitor both cloud an on-prem infrastructures, displayed in one dashboard."
"Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic. There is currently no visibility in that channel."
"Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"Some issues with login errors."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 155 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of AppDynamics writes "Very good real-time monitoring capabilities, deep problem diagnosis, and transaction mapping". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications. See our AppDynamics vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring 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.