We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Operations Management and ITRS Geneos based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: BMC TrueSight Operations Management is chosen over ITRS Geneos based on its robust event management tool, precise monitoring and metrics data, and Helix Innovation Studio for app development. ITRS Geneos is customizable with real-time monitoring, but needs improvement in dashboard creation, deployment automation, and cloud monitoring. BMC TrueSight Operations Management is affordable with a clear licensing model for companies of all sizes, while ITRS Geneos may be too costly for non-finance industries.
"It provides common administration, and a Single Sign-On Platform with RBAC, which eases the cross launch between multiple tools"
"I like the event management part."
"The ability of this platform to monitor the very diverse assets that we maintain around the world is its most valuable feature... We support a vast array of manufacturers' equipment, like HP, IBM, Cisco, Dell, EMC, Hitachi... We can do it all with [this] one [solution]."
"The most valuable features of BMC TrueSight Operations Management are the blackouts and event management."
"The initial setup of BMC TrueSight Operations Management was easy."
"Helix Innovation Studio is a very good feature. It allows us to develop our own enterprise applications and make them available for the customers."
"The solution has a very good business event manager tool."
"From an administrative standpoint, what stands out in TrueSight is the ability to implement quickly. When they have a requirement to monitor something, we're able to turn that on quickly in their environment. We're able to set up new apps within a day."
"It's a very powerful application monitoring tool across the industry. Many free, open-source tools are available. There are also paid tools, but ITRS Geneos is a real-time application monitoring tool where the user can monitor, self-configure, and manage alerts through their console."
"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."
"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."
"The great advantage of this tool is real-time monitoring."
"ITRS uses SNMP to communicate with our devices as well as SNMP net probes installed on our servers."
"The clean and colorful UI and easy to use options like snooze and active times."
"It's also easy to implement. The implementation of Geneos is very easy and interesting. It's not complicated. It's very quick to implement. The installation is very easy. There are many topics about ITRS Geneos that explain more about the features of the function of Geneos."
"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."
"Specifically around application performance monitoring, BMC is definitely not the market leader. The Dynatraces, the New Relics and the like are more of the market leaders in that space. I would like to see them grow that space a little bit more aggressively. It has not really been their bread and butter."
"We were somewhat limited in TrueSight due to some of the RBAC controls not quite being what we wanted as far as delegating out administrative privileges for implementation. But because we were able to turn requests around pretty well, that burden wasn't too heavy."
"This solution is lacking in application monitoring features. Technical support for this solution also needs improvement, particularly in product knowledge and response time."
"In a large company of our size, we need multiple people in our company trained. So, I have to take the training classes. Then, I have to go and train the rest of my organization. I would prefer to say to the other people on my team, "Go to this link and..." Or, "Here's a list of training sessions that you can go to which are online and that are free." I think it would help the adoption of their product in the marketplace, personally."
"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."
"The UI for the end users could be improved and more flexible than it is now."
"It's too complex, too many servers are required, there are too many different components in the solution, and a lot of agents are required."
"The solution could improve its price."
"ITRS have started to make some major changes that we haven't taken on board yet, in the creation of dashboards and more visibility of the metrics that we collect. At the moment, that's something that's lacking, but I know they have addressed it. Still, it’s not that easy to create stuff to help with visibility and dashboarding in Geneos."
"I would like ITRS Geneos to develop an app, where instead of going to specific login terminals or logging into laptops or desktops to check alerts, we can have visibility in the app itself."
"Data visualization – real time and historical – is a weakness."
"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."
"ITRS Geneos is not on the cloud at a time when everyone is moving to the cloud."
"It needs to be easier to configure, especially with the JMX plugins."
"A lightweight version which could host more than 100 gateways, as we can see slowness while loading all our gateways."
"One thing that could be improved in terms of rapid scaling would be more ability to clone aspects of an implementation. It seems like there are opportunities in this area, where we have repetitive tasks to do when it comes to implementing things on new servers or on new gateways. It would be great if there was an easy way to clone something that had already been done."
More BMC TrueSight Operations Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 16th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 50 reviews while ITRS Geneos is ranked 12th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 57 reviews. BMC TrueSight Operations Management is rated 8.2, while ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2. 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 ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with BMC Helix Monitor, Dynatrace, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Zabbix and IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus, whereas ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana, Datadog and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring. See our BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. ITRS Geneos report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
