We performed a comparison between AppDynamics and OpenText Real User Monitoring 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 SAP monitoring element is very helpful."
"The features that I like best are the dashboard and Business Journey."
"The most valuable feature is the detailed statistics, like the consumer count, for the ActiveMQ server."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the fact that it is very easy to use, making it easy to implement...It is a very stable solution."
"The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is its ability to track the transactions between different applications."
"We're a large organization, so we appreciate AppDynamics' wide coverage. It may not work in all areas, but it has broad coverage. We can use the same dataset for different use case aspects. That is the beauty of AppDynamics. You can coordinate APM, EUM, and infrastructure through one dataset."
"AppDynamics provides us with detailed information about the performance of the underlying infrastructure, including servers, databases, and external services."
"The solution saves time and cost."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"Very easy to implement."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The QA and test environment need improvement."
"The solution could improve by covering more technologies. For example, it does support .NET Core applications. However, it could be a bit better."
"While it is scalable, it could be better."
"Its resiliency can be improved. We're told that the best we can do with an on-prem solution is to have a hot standby that requires a manual switchover. So, it is a do-it-yourself Ikea model of maintaining data consistency between two servers, without having low balance or failover considerations for an on-prem solution."
"They are using Flash for their website, which is very slow. We had hoped the website would be much faster to use, and that is definitely what we want to see."
"In the current version of AppDynamics, there is a correlated section, where we can see all servers’ performance along with application performance, but network performance is missing."
"The documentation and training material have room for improvement."
"The infrastructure is not as good as other solutions."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"Some issues with login errors."
"Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely."
"Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic. There is currently no visibility in that channel."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 155 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. 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 Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications. See our AppDynamics vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring 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.
