We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Server Monitoring and ITRS Geneos based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The auto-discovery of the logs is the most valuable feature. It requires minimal configuration, we just need to set up on once and it automatically detects through the code."
"The event alerting feature or the trigger system is what I like most about AppDynamics Server Monitoring. Whenever an issue occurs, the tool automatically generates an even trigger that tells engineers in the company to take action, so it's an essential feature of AppDynamics Server Monitoring. Another valuable feature of the tool is end-to-end monitoring, which means if you need to debug, you can go transaction by transaction, where the issue lies, and how it's linked. For example, if it's a low-performance issue, you can look into it more through AppDynamics Server Monitoring in terms of which area takes too much time to execute. You can also see the SQL queries and the kind of query going on through the tool."
"The product has the ability to drill down to the errors whenever we have issues."
"We can view the server activities, including issues in the process, with a single click."
"The platform is reliable in identifying the core system issues."
"The product provides a nice end-user experience."
"What I like most about AppDynamics Server Monitoring is that it's easy to manipulate and easy to implement. All solutions have the same features, but what sets AppDynamics Server Monitoring apart is that it's really quick to implement. AppDynamics Server Monitoring has a great interface. As a developer, it doesn't matter whether it's SolarWinds, Dynatrace, or any APM you're using, but it would matter to the customer. A product must be easy to manipulate or use, for example, AppDynamics Server Monitoring, for the customer, but for developers like my team, there's no pressure, even if a solution requires coding."
"I like Business iQ the most, so far. It has great analytics configurations and I can get real-time updates. We have eCommerce releases every week. So the one use case that I use Business iQ is to compare before and after release performance using AppDynamics."
"The flexibility of the product is most valuable. It is highly customizable. If you put your mind to it and think of something you could do, there's a good possibility you can get it integrated within the console, if it's not readily available. The simplicity or ease of customization has been valuable."
"The clean and colorful UI and easy to use options like snooze and active times."
"The Netprobe is so lightweight compared to the agents that most monitoring tools use. It's really superior to the competition. The agent that is used by almost every competitive tool takes a lot more system resources. It's slower and it requires a greater effort and more compromises in terms of security to install on the monitored servers. With Geneos, because it lives outside the code, it is far easier and far less taxing on the monitored systems."
"One of the best aspects of Geneos is that it has a broad scope and can cover a lot of use cases. You can write your own scripts to monitor really specific things. And the rules that you can put in place can be quite complex for the alerts."
"It enables us to monitor application processes, to do log-monitoring on a 24/7 basis, to do server-level monitoring - all the hardware parameters - as well as monitor connectivity across applications to the interfaces."
"Custom script toolkits"
"The ability to completely tailor and customize what it's monitoring is one of its strongest points. A lot of other monitoring tools are good at certain things, but one of my colleagues described it as the “Swiss Army Knife” of monitoring tools. It can do anything you want."
"This tool allows one to analyse, integrate and customize as per the systems and allows you to set your own rules."
"An area for improvement in AppDynamics Server Monitoring is integration; in particular, it needs a better way to integrate with custom applications such as Siebel CRM. Right now, it's challenging to integrate AppDynamics Server Monitoring with Siebel CRM because it sometimes gives an error and cannot integrate properly."
"Things are being done differently in the industry now, and many of these problems are being solved with cloud databases."
"AppDynamics Server Monitoring has room for improvement in terms of pricing. If the price could be cheaper, it would be great for both the customer and the integrator. What I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Server Monitoring is a better dashboard for the customer. The dashboard should be more interactive."
"The solution has performance issues after we deploy the agent."
"If we consider the implementation of alternative solutions, such as Dynatrace, there is a notable difference in the approach to agent-based service monitoring. For instance, Dynatrace employs a single-agent solution, which can pose security concerns. When installing Dynatrace, granting the agent ld pro payload rights is a requirement. In contrast, our solution ensures a more secure approach by not requiring root and administration access. While we currently utilize an agent-based solution, there may be a shift in the next one or two years, possibly with the adoption of Open Telemetry. It's anticipated that many APM vendors, including Dynatrace, may alter their structure or strategy for implementation. However, as of now, the trend is towards an increasing number of implementations daily."
"The tool should provide information like the number of connections and processes utilized in real time."
"The solution could be more mobile friendly."
"I would like the ability to choose from some pre-defined dashboards and reports because as it is now, you have to define them separately for each implementation."
"At the moment Geneos is excellent and handling real time monitoring, however not great at doing historical reporting."
"The main feature that needs work is the Dashboard designer."
"They have the Webslinger solution where you can see when something is alerting. It's a little bit cumbersome."
"One area where there is room for improvement is the log file. I would like to be able to do a pre-run on the log files. When you are testing log files for regular expressions, it would be good to be able to do a quick check up front on that side of things before you release that into production."
"The ITA, the post-incident analytics, could be improved."
"Mobile phone integration is probably not as rich as it could be."
"Currently, it is difficult to monitor secure websites using SSL or with SSO enabled."
"Their cloud monitoring solution needs to be improved. I have already given them the feedback that it's not capable of meeting the latest technology needs."
More AppDynamics Server Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Server Monitoring is ranked 19th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 16 reviews while ITRS Geneos is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 57 reviews. AppDynamics Server Monitoring is rated 8.2, while ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Server Monitoring writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides real-time information on servers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". AppDynamics Server Monitoring is most compared with OpsRamp, Zabbix, Nutanix Prism, PRTG Network Monitor and Cisco Intersight, whereas ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana, Prometheus and ServiceNow IT Operations Management. See our AppDynamics Server Monitoring vs. ITRS Geneos report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
