We performed a comparison between Broadcom DX Application Performance Management 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."JVM memory monitoring and connection pool monitoring are valuable features."
"Proactive snapshots of transactions and all details of a transaction are saved in case of an error."
"The features that I find most valuable are related to network monitoring."
"Now, we know we have a problem, because there is a primary layer of alerting or metrics monitoring put in place, that is the good part."
"The triage can find the root cause for pent up issues."
"Our development cycle has definitely improved as far as the turnaround time on fixes and improvements."
"Service maturity when you can retrieve the normal metrics for every major aspect of each module and delivering this info to the correct eyes."
"Some of its valuable features include transaction traces, dashboards, and metric grouping to see combined data."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"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."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"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 product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"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."
"Dashboards need to be improved in order to make them self-explanatory."
"You can sell licenses and install the full tool on service, you can show customers how to install, but how to use it and solve issues cannot be done without the experience."
"I would like to see intelligence, deep intelligence or deep analytics."
"Very often, we use tools such as Kibana or Jaspersoft for dashboards and reporting on CA APM data because CA APM’s old interfaces do not reflect well in modern displays, compared to those new tools."
"Technical support is slow to respond and also asks redundant questions."
"Needs the ability to dynamically create dashboards. Right now, we do custom dashboards. Everything is created manually."
"What comes to mind when you speak of a room for improvement in Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is the infrastructure agent, but my company doesn't use it, so I can't say if it's really a problem or not, but it could be the container support or cloud support that could be improved in the solution. An additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is for it to have one agent for cloud and one agent for legacy, with all features included."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"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."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"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."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 22nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". 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". Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, New Relic and BMC TrueSight Operations Management, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Broadcom DX Application Performance Management 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.