Apica vs OpenText Real User Monitoring comparison

Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Apica  Logo
933 views|567 comparisons
OpenText Logo
707 views|526 comparisons
55% willing to recommend
Comparison Buyer's Guide
Executive Summary

We performed a comparison between Apica and OpenText Real User Monitoring based on real PeerSpot user reviews.

Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability.
To learn more, read our detailed Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability Report (Updated: April 2024).
767,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Featured Review
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use.
Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
"With the ZebraTester, the ability to have and store dynamic variables, when setting up the monitors, means you can extract that value and use it in a subsequent service call. This is something that has made our lives easier... This is one of the features that I like the most because it helps us in configuring these services, in a certain flow, without the need to re-record the whole thing.""As always, within the IT industry, everybody's always looking to upgrade and update everything else like that. Apica has been one of those things but it's really hard to replace because it offers us the unique capability to see what the customer is seeing. A lot of other ones can do Selenium script and things like that, but there's a lot in Apica that we use right now. We utilize a lot of the scenario options in Apica right now, and there's a lot of other ones that do parts of it, but it doesn't do everything that Apica does.""You can tell from the operational space of people who are using and consuming this data that they are more integrated. It is not dependent on one team anymore. It saves a lot of time by capturing and pinpointing the exact problem that is happening quickly. We have moved from getting escalations manually to getting escalations synthetically.""It helps with releases because we monitor them in staging. We can tell if something is critically wrong before it gets into production, e.g., if it was load related or function related and also what was different in the dev stage. It then alerts us straightaway inside of our production monitors once it has been released. Therefore, it has improved how we run our systems since we monitor multiple environments.""There are several features that are really good. The first one is the flexibility and the advanced configuration that Apica offers when it comes to configuring synthetic checks. It provides the ability to customize how the check should be performed and it is very flexible in the number of synthetic locations that it can use. It allows us to run scripts from different locations all over the world, and they have a really good number of these locations.""From our standpoint, there are a number of valuable features. The WebHooks are obviously really great. The alert framework is really good and then the reporting and visualizations that you get from the dashboards is good. Those three areas are primarily what my team's focused on in terms of usage from day to day.""We see the benefit almost every day. It allows us to be alerted whenever there is a store that is not responding properly around the world. We do have a network operation center (NOC) who receives these alerts, immediately checking if everything is okay.""Our application SREs do script checks in such a way that closely mimic our customers' actions using the platform. Because there are so many different ways and options to be able to configure checks to closely mirror your applications' capabilities, it provides a lot of optionality for teams to create the right type of check that can notify when there are any issues. At the end of the day, we want our monitoring tools to be able to catch any outage before our customers do. This is where Apica Synthetic does a great job."

More Apica Pros →

"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity.""Very easy to implement.""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 technical support is good at resolving issues.""The reporting feature is good for us.""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."

More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pros →

Cons
"The accuracy of alerts can be improved a little bit. Right now, it's pretty good in terms of alerting pretty quickly about failures or changes in response times. However, what we have seen happen is the number of alerts that we are getting is very frequent, and we would like to tone down the number of alerts. That's the only trouble we have. Apica could tone down those settings because there is no option for us to tone it down to a level that would reduce the alerts to a minimum. As a platform, it does send us good alerts, but it could be improved a bit.""Learning the tool has always been a little difficult from a scripting perspective because the framework is proprietary and unique. Once we became used to what it does and how to perform it, then it became easier for my team and me. I would like to see some of the testing steps be part of a more well-known language, like Java or Python. That would be a big improvement.""The initial screen on their dashboard could have a bit more data, but this is a small thing. It could have more data, so we do not need to drill down to a screen behind that initial information. I would like them to get a little better on the user interfaces that we need to go into.""Alerting needs improvement. It's a little noisy. It needs some better options. Currently, they have an issue, when you set up a synthetic monitor, you can set up where it's monitoring from, a data center that Apica owns.""The having to install an application on your desktop to utilize something like ZebraTester is a little cumbersome. It would be nice to see that become a web-based application. Having the documentation a little more accessible, and easier to digest by people who are just learning how to use the framework, especially when it comes to more complex or more edge-based cases would be really helpful to have.""When it comes to the way the internal agent is installed, because you can install an application on a server, I would love to see the application Docker-ized. If you could install internal agents using Docker or using containers, it would be easier for us to manage them and spin up internal agents.""There are some components of the user interface that are not up to date. Just to give you an idea, today we have web applications that are called single-page applications that are much faster than the old style of web application. If we can move faster into the flow of the graphic user interface, and in a more effective way, it will save us a lot of time.""We have been focused on reducing polling times for synthetic checks. We have gone from 10 minutes down to five minutes for a pretty broad swath, but there is some appetite to reduce that further, which could be an improvement."

More Apica Cons →

"This technology is considered to be older.""We would like to see support for non-Windows environments.""Some issues with login errors.""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.""When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported.""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 Cons →

Pricing and Cost Advice
  • "The pricing and licensing are very reasonable. At the end of the day, you are using their technology/software and getting X amount of checks for a very decent value. As for discounts, they try to meet your budgets as much as they can. For example, if you need 100 checks and you have X amount of budget for it, then they will try and get down to that price. Costing-wise, it is a reasonably cost product. They will always try and come down to your price if you need them to come down to it by knocking off certain areas."
  • "Apica is pretty cost-effective if you buy both solutions together: Synthetic and LoadTest. If you are going for one solution, the cost is on par with any tool in the market."
  • "The level of alerting accuracy has saved us time and money in operational costs. Overall, it has automated a lot of the manual efforts which have been more complex with some of our other scripting tools or monitors. So, it brings things together by doing things faster and saves us money."
  • "License management is another area that Apica could do better. We have already had these conversations with our account teams. This is something that they are looking at largely improving in upcoming releases. I believe that this is already on their roadmap."
  • "The pricing is very reasonable, but it is not cheap."
  • "Another main difference between Apica and the other products was the cost. We really thought that the balance in Apica between the features and costs was the best among all the products on which we did a PoC."
  • More Apica Pricing and Cost Advice →

  • "The price is approximately €30,000 ($35,500 USD) for the enterprise edition."
  • "If I compare with other vendors, other vendors are more expensive"
  • "Not expensive."
  • More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →

    report
    Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
    767,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Questions from the Community
    Ask a question

    Earn 20 points

    Top Answer:Real User Monitor has improved our productivity.
    Top Answer: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.
    Top Answer:We use Real User Monitor to monitor services and capture problems from a user perspective, such as availability issues. The reports and metrics we collect from Real User Monitor help us to improve our… more »
    Ranking
    Views
    933
    Comparisons
    567
    Reviews
    0
    Average Words per Review
    0
    Rating
    N/A
    Views
    707
    Comparisons
    526
    Reviews
    1
    Average Words per Review
    430
    Rating
    8.0
    Comparisons
    Also Known As
    Apica LoadTest, Apica Synthetic
    Micro Focus Real User Monitor, Micro Focus RUM, HPE RUM, MF RUM
    Learn More
    Overview

    Apica offers a unified perspective on the entire technology stack, encompassing logs, metrics, traces, and APIs. This operational data fabric facilitates quick identification and resolution of performance issues throughout an enterprise's infrastructure. The platform's user-friendly features, including a drag-and-drop interface for dashboards and seamless integrations with tools like Prometheus and Elasticsearch, enhance ease of use and management. Apica's active observability swiftly analyzes telemetry data in real-time, enabling prompt issue resolution, while automated root cause analysis, powered by machine learning, streamlines troubleshooting in complex distributed systems. The platform's advanced data management centralizes observability data, simplifying storage, search, and analysis, thereby unveiling valuable insights and patterns. Apica also ensures compliance and governance, providing audit trails to help enterprises meet regulatory requirements. Whether for enterprises of all sizes or those with intricate distributed systems, Apica emerges as a robust tool to elevate technology stack observability and performance.

    Real User Monitoring (RUM) an End user monitoring that gives you visibility into user behavior for fast, targeted problem resolution. It monitors the performance and availability of business-critical application services for all users at all locations all the time. It automatically discovers underlying infrastructure and classifies user actions - giving you instant visibility into session and whole service health over web, cloud, and mobile user experience. It allows you to trace user experience across tiers, capture live sessions, see where customers clicked, measure response times, and see pages that caused problems. And you can easily capture and replay user sessions to create test scripts that reflect real user behavior. All this data gives you new ability to analyze which application transactions your users are performing and what application response they are experiencing. RUM currently supports over 20 application protocols and applications such as SAP, Citrix, and native mobile application monitoring on Android.

    Sample Customers
    HBO
    Avea, Maccabi Healthcare Services, TEB
    Top Industries
    REVIEWERS
    Financial Services Firm40%
    Hospitality Company20%
    Retailer10%
    Comms Service Provider10%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm40%
    Insurance Company10%
    Computer Software Company9%
    Media Company5%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Financial Services Firm31%
    Manufacturing Company13%
    Government9%
    Computer Software Company8%
    Company Size
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise14%
    Large Enterprise71%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business14%
    Midsize Enterprise5%
    Large Enterprise81%
    REVIEWERS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise11%
    Large Enterprise67%
    VISITORS READING REVIEWS
    Small Business22%
    Midsize Enterprise8%
    Large Enterprise70%
    Buyer's Guide
    Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
    April 2024
    Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: April 2024.
    767,319 professionals have used our research since 2012.

    Apica is ranked 55th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 45th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. Apica is rated 8.6, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of Apica writes "Their support makes the product so much easier to use. They sped up our migration process". 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". Apica is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics, Apache JMeter and OpenText LoadRunner Cloud, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications.

    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.