We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Operations Management and Quest Foglight for APM [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."BMC TrueSight Operations Management is easily scalable."
"Valuable features include wide support for monitoring, strong event management, service management capability, baselining (analytics) and easy to integrate other tools with it."
"I believe that the ease of use and UI is great"
"Intelligent solution with a proactive monitoring feature and consolidated dashboard that's stable and easy to scale."
"It is a very stable product."
"Using the TrueSight platform we can monitor server performance and notify the customers using the integrated ticketing for events. We can let them know if there are any issues with a server, or application, or database."
"It is breadth. It covers so many different technologies which can roll up into a single console."
"The most valuable features of BMC TrueSight Operations Management are the blackouts and event management."
"Infrastructure Monitoring and End User Monitoring are the product’s most valuable features to me."
"Sometimes we can solve problems before they occur."
"The most valuable feature is drill-down monitoring, which shows us from one interface the transaction chain from the front end to back end."
"Intuitive, Single-pane-of-glass dashboards for real-time statistics and long-term statistics for capacity management and in-depth analytics"
"Real time database monitoring and alerting are valuable."
"With the APM you can replay the end user session and see issues quickly by viewing the session."
"At a glance I can easily see what is going on with all of my VMware environments, including top consumers of resources."
"FxV is valuable as we can playback the session."
"There are some small limitations with this tool in terms of reporting dashboards that fit all of the requirements of the individual customer."
"The product must provide application or service monitoring features."
"I think the ease of deployment needs to be looked at. It would be great if the deployment was faster and easier."
"I definitely would like to see more improvement in the self-diagnostics. I need to know when anything is not working or collecting, long before our customer finds it."
"One of the things that the TrueSight environment is missing is some of the HA abilities. The data collection server called the ISM doesn't really have the HA functionality or workload balancing. It was missing from the previous product as well. It's missing redundancy."
"We have a unique use case because BMC typically sells this solution into enterprises that are deploying it within their IT, versus to a managed services provider like us where we're supporting thousands of customers. Multi-tenancy and the scalability have been challenges along the way, as we've grown... If anything could have gone better as we were ramping this up and adding a lot of volume to it, I would say it's the scalability. That would be one thing that could be improved."
"I would like them to improve the deep-dive details, tracing, and data agents in this product. We have EUEM, an end-user experience monitoring appliance. This one's quicker than the current one, and reporting side and filtration side are very bad. There are many details we look at and explain what we receive information in the current one, but we cannot have historical data like we do with EUEM. We cannot have a powerful point to look for specific traffic from a specific application and a specific browser. We don't have it in the new one. The current BMC also needs to add the thing that control versions."
"The product must provide more AI capabilities."
"They need to improve the stability of FxM and FxV."
"It needs a more intuitive way to create and implement custom "Cartridges" to be deployed through out a Federated environment."
"SQL agents often failed but again this may have been addressed in future versions."
"We are running a Webmethods stack (Software AG) and Foglight is unable to instrument. We are in a POC with Dynatrace and it was able to instrument with little effort."
"There are some metrics I'd like to track that are difficult to find or implement into a tracking solution without a lot of manual work."
"I think installation and setup needs little more improvement especially when you are installing with external database."
"I want to see a new interface that contains HTML5 features. The current version of Foglight (on-premise edition) is so fusty in comparison with leaders of Gartner APM Quadrant - i.e. Appdynamics, NewRelic, Dynatrace."
"The version compatibility needs work."
More BMC TrueSight Operations Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 16th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 48 reviews while Quest Foglight for APM [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. BMC TrueSight Operations Management is rated 8.2, while Quest Foglight for APM [EOL] is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Operations Management writes "The product is reasonably priced, but the solution is a little obsolete because it is deployed on-premise". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest Foglight for APM [EOL] writes "We evaluated other options including BMC, but chose Foglight for it's notifications & the ability to review the history". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with BMC Helix Monitor, Dynatrace, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Zabbix and New Relic, whereas Quest Foglight for APM [EOL] is most compared with Catchpoint.
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.