We performed a comparison between Grafana and VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Grafana offers a more customizable and visually appealing experience with good integration and an open source nature, at a more moderate pricing model with a helpful community, making it the preferred solution. While VMware Tanzu Observability is praised for ease of deployment and integration with multiple solutions, it has concerns with its consumption-based billing model, high license costs, and difficulty in customizing dashboards.
"This solution provides valuable insights into the health of our infrastructure in real time."
"We like the alert features."
"Grafana's built-in integration with third-party tools, databases, and MQs is an amazing feature."
"We can write queries in different languages, which is beneficial for visualization."
"Kubernetes could help us to better visualize the trend of our data by recording and displaying our history over a chosen duration, such as the last 30 days."
"The product's initial setup phase was very easy."
"What I found most valuable in Grafana is that it has a lot of integrations and features that I need for data processing and visualization."
"Great capacity planning and the solution has a great GUI."
"No issues with stability."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"People are very pleased with the implementation."
"There is a need for improvement in automating daily monitoring reports, especially when alerts are triggered due to system downtimes or fluctuations."
"The product's configuration for saving files could be improved."
"Lacks in-depth graphs and sufficient AI."
"The main drawback is the necessity for endpoint monitoring."
"It's difficult to see the trends on the graph when the range is too long."
"There are some areas of network drives that are not showing as expected based on server usage."
"It would be helpful if Grafana provided more information and training on how to use Prometheus."
"One area for improvement in Grafana is that depending on your version, you have to pay for the features, making the license expensive. It would be great if the licensing model could be more flexible. In the next release of Grafana, I want cluster creation to be available, which would help in Grafana deployment and scaling. Currently, the scaling process for the solution is a bit complicated."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 9 reviews. Grafana is rated 8.0, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry, Dynatrace and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver), whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, AppDynamics and Prometheus. See our Grafana vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications 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.