We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring and AWS Auto Scaling 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 most valuable feature is that we can see how our end-users are interacting with our application across regions."
"We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems."
"We used AppDynamics to identify gaps and bottlenecks in the software."
"One noteworthy feature is user journey analysis, which enables tracking user interactions and conversion paths on a website."
"The most valuable feature is the end-user monitoring."
"The feature we find most valuable, is that the solution creates a unified platform making it really easy to pinpoint a problem, and then drill down into a transaction to resolve the issue."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring provides smooth connectivity to different applications."
"It is a stable solution that helps address user issues well."
"The tool gives you the flexibility to scale up and grow. The solution is also fast to deploy."
"The various scaling options available, such as step scaling, are particularly useful."
"The good thing about Autoscaling is that it provides the capacity to minimize downtime. So, it gives you the assurance of stability and robustness within your system."
"Our internal business applications are hosted in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The health check integration feature ensures that the instances are healthy and capable of absorbing traffic, thus serving their purpose effectively."
"It can scale."
"The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. When it reaches seventy percent, it sends me an email notification."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"They do not have robust documentation."
"I would like to have customizable dashboards to use when I am monitoring certain applications."
"We would like to be able to easily use this solution to monitor our Java script based browsers, which are currently blocked by the security settings."
"The interface and user experience could be better."
"What could be improved in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for the synthetic jobs or synthetic agents, in particular, you can't do a lot of tests with just one agent. You have to install a lot of agents if you want to do more tests, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that you're only able to see basic metrics in the absence of server or database visibility. For the SaaS version of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring, my team just downloaded then installed the extension in an application in Azure to see the application on the controller, so if this can be done in the on-premise version of the solution as well, without needing to install the agent on the machine, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring better. Currently, the .NET agent consumes the CPU or memory and clients usually raise this issue with my team, so it would be good if the on-premises version doesn't require agent installation on the machine. Another functionality I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for it to receive updates from the file config without needing to reset IIS because right now when you do a modification in IIS, you have to restart IIS. When you add a service to the agent config, you have to restart IIS. For the product server, it's not possible to reset IIS after you make changes to the config file, so if this could be improved, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a better solution."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring needs to offer an end-to-end experience, including the internet layer and third-party elements that come into play on websites."
"I would like to see support for mobile testing and mobile monitoring."
"While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support."
"The solution must improve automation."
"The billing and cost optimization of the solution could be improved."
"The tool must include AI features."
"The product’s security features need improvement."
"The solution is not out-of-the-box and you have to study to use it. It should be more easier to use."
"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"We can have more auto scaling algorithms implemented in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers."
More AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 14 reviews while AWS Auto Scaling is ranked 15th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 18 reviews. AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is rated 8.2, while AWS Auto Scaling is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring writes "End-to-end visibility, feature-rich, but the support could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of AWS Auto Scaling writes "The product helps reduce costs and avoids interruptions to the customer experience". AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is most compared with Elastic Observability, New Relic and AWS X-Ray, whereas AWS Auto Scaling is most compared with . See our AWS Auto Scaling vs. AppDynamics Browser 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.
