We performed a comparison between Datadog 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."I find the greatest feature is being able to search across logs from various microservices."
"Most of the features in the way Datadog does monitoring are commendable and that is the reason we choose it. We did some comparisons before picking Datadog. Datadog was recommended based on the features provided."
"It is a good one stop location where we keep all our data for our infrastructure, and it's also easier to navigate between different things."
"The solution has offered increased visibility via logging APM, metrics, RUM, etc."
"The most valuable aspects of the product include the APM and profiler."
"It has provided visibility with ease of implementation and allowed multiple teams to quickly onboard it."
"By moving to Datadog, we did not need to manage our own monitoring infrastructure anymore."
"Datadog agents act as an integration to different services, providing easy access and management."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"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 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."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"Very easy to implement."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"We would like to see some versioning system for the Synthetic Tests so that we could have a backup of our tests since they are time-consuming to make and very easy to damage in a moment of error."
"It could probably be a little bit of a better user experience."
"This service could be less costly."
"The parallel editing of the dashboards should not cause users to lose the work of another person."
"Alerting timing should be improved to be more fine-tuned and exact."
"It seems that admin cost control granularity is an afterthought."
"I'm not sure what kind of features are in the roadmap right now, but I encourage the development of features for defining your organization, and allowing the visibility of what kind of metrics you can get. Those features would be really useful for us."
"The Log Explorer could be better. I don't think it has log manipulation as Splunk does."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"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."
"Some issues with login errors."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"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."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datadog is ranked 1st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 137 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 45th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". 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". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, Dynatrace and Honeycomb.io. See our Datadog 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.