We performed a comparison between Instana Dynamic APM and OpenText SiteScope 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."It's great for monitoring services and applications."
"The platform’s most valuable feature is the ability to monitor the performance of containers for request and response analysis."
"Sometimes it's able to provide a proper RCA on its own. It's able to correlate different events that occurred and that becomes like an RCA in itself."
"Its GUI is really good and it easy to understand for non-technical users."
"The detailing of our application behavior and user experience is most valuable. In case there is an issue, we typically use Instana to figure it out. We can drill down to the application and figure out what's going on and where the issue is."
"The primary selling point of this product is its unparalleled transparency into the infrastructure."
"With Instana, the interface and the UI are very simple to use."
"Visually, it's very good. It provides everything needed for dynamic detection, which is very useful."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"We'd always like to see additional functionalities."
"The configuration of Instana Dynamic APM needs improvement because it requires quite a bit of work."
"Its SLI and SLA features need improvement in setting up alerts."
"I think that Instana should improve the university and the certification process, so the users can find experts in Instana with their certification module process."
"The integration could be improved with more plugins or open API."
"We should be able to go back to scenarios during or before the issue. There should be something like a history playback. Such a feature or functionality would be good."
"They could improve the product’s dashboards and provide more dashboard options."
"Many managers, as well as our customers, used to ask for reports, such as "top X number of queries that are slow," or "top pages that have the highest number of issues." This is something that can be improved by Instana. Currently, they don't have that kind of reporting available out-of-the-box."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
Instana Dynamic APM is ranked 23rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 12 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Instana Dynamic APM is rated 7.4, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Instana Dynamic APM writes "A really good GUI that is easy for non-technical users to understand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". Instana Dynamic APM is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, New Relic, Elastic Observability and IBM Application Performance Management, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our Instana Dynamic APM vs. OpenText SiteScope 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.