We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and OpenText Diagnostics 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 flow map is very valuable to us. Before we installed APM, we had no idea how our application looked."
"Transition tracing is the most valuable is pretty easy and useful, but the user experience piece is also good."
"We have been able to monitor our applications more accurately."
"Provides monitoring more around business processes versus just servers, applications, etc. E.g., with complex systems, where a business process passes across multiple applications, the business needs us to monitor the heath of the process, not just a segment of the application."
"The most valuable feature is the flow map."
"This solution not only provides answers but also provides sensor data. This allows us to quickly resolve issues that developers may take a long time to solve."
"That visual representation’s been really good, also the overhead that AppDynamics creates is quite small. We've tried Dynatrace in the past. Some of the applications didn't work as well with Dynatrace."
"After we implemented this solution, we can easily determine the root cause of issues."
"For banking and telecom solutions, it's been quite useful."
"The diagnostics and configuration are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"The most valuable feature of Micro Focus Diagnostics is the information reported from an application that has timed out. For example, when you're Googling, or you're booking a ticket for Burj Khalifa here, the longest tower in the world, there are situations where the system can time out. There are times when you might not receive a response on the payment gateway or you are not able to find the reservation. The customer only receives the information that the session has timed out."
"The UI could use a little help."
"AppDynamics's agent management could be improved."
"There are many KPIs that are not available in AppDynamics."
"AppDynamics is dealing with a lot of products and technologies, so we need to have clear documentation."
"It could be a little more flexible in configuration on the back end."
"AppDynamics' modules and hardware resources are very high."
"While it is scalable, it could be better."
"The integration part in AppDynamics with other systems is an area with a little difficulty, especially when it comes to the configuration area. The integration of AppDynamics with other products takes a lot of time."
"The interface could be more user friendly."
"The interface is very old, and not very user-friendly. Most of our clients don't like the UI."
"The GUI and metrics of Micro Focus Diagnostics can be improved. The metrics the solution gathers can be limited and could be enhanced by giving more details."
Earn 20 points
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 155 reviews while OpenText Diagnostics is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 4 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while OpenText Diagnostics is rated 7.8. 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 Diagnostics writes "Very good for transaction level monitoring, but expensive and HP needs better support and training". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas OpenText Diagnostics is most compared with Dynatrace. See our AppDynamics vs. OpenText Diagnostics 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.