We performed a comparison between AppDynamics 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."The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is its ability to track the transactions between different applications."
"AppDynamics provides us with detailed information about the performance of the underlying infrastructure, including servers, databases, and external services."
"It gives me the ability to trace logs between transactions, for example, a DB transaction or JVM transaction from one hub to the other. I can easily find out where the problem is or where the bottleneck of the issues lies."
"The initial setup is simple."
"The best features of AppDynamics would be the code application monitoring capabilities."
"I like how the AppDynamics dashboard portrays the information flows. When a task is executed, various flows between different applications and databases happen in the background. The dashboard is intuitive and helps visualize the connections, the directions of the flow, and the information related to these specific sessions."
"We previously had an operations team continuously monitoring applications. Now, they just have set things up and our developers can monitor, view, and act on them, accordingly."
"The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is Proactive Monitoring and Alerting."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"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."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The end-user experience is not really good because we can't catch all of the transactions. We only can catch the full stack of flow transactions, but I think that this is caused by the technology they use. If they will catch every transaction, it will cause a very big load on the performance of applications. The monitoring of all transactions needs improvement."
"The resolution time takes longer than expected."
"The dashboard can be better. Also, the automated reports could be improved."
"AppDynamics could benefit from greater integration with emerging technologies such as artificial intelligence and machine learning."
"We constantly need to improve our alert mechanism because we get a lot of false-positive alerts. These are not real errors. In addition, for end-user monitoring, sometimes, we are not able to catch all user activities. Because of not being able to follow the user activity from the start to the end, we are missing out on the performance issues."
"I would like to be able to monitor both cloud an on-prem infrastructures, displayed in one dashboard."
"The solution could be more user-friendly for diagnostic purposes. Anyone who is using the solution should be able to infer what that error is about, they should be able to troubleshoot it better."
"The solution could improve by covering more technologies. For example, it does support .NET Core applications. However, it could be a bit better."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"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."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
AppDynamics is ranked 5th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 153 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. AppDynamics is rated 8.2, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. 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 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". AppDynamics is most compared with Dynatrace, Elastic Observability, Datadog, Splunk Enterprise Security and New Relic, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, Prometheus, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our AppDynamics 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.
