We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring 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."We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring provides smooth connectivity to different applications."
"It provides a lot of data, so it helps businesses identify their user base."
"The most valuable feature is the one that enables you to have visibility into the end-users journey."
"We used AppDynamics to identify gaps and bottlenecks in the software."
"The feature we find most valuable, is that the solution creates a unified platform making it really easy to pinpoint a problem, and then drill down into a transaction to resolve the issue."
"It is a stable solution that helps address user issues well."
"The best feature of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that it lets you find errors in synthetic jobs ahead of the users. The solution shows you all front-end metrics. You can also see JavaScript errors and jQuery errors through AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring. You can also do a correlation between the front end and the backend, or from the user to the navigator, to the backend through the solution."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The interface and user experience could be better."
"I would like to have customizable dashboards to use when I am monitoring certain applications."
"They do not have robust documentation."
"I would like to see support for mobile testing and mobile monitoring."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring needs to offer an end-to-end experience, including the internet layer and third-party elements that come into play on websites."
"If you have a single URL and all the operations are coming in as part of the header, you will not be able to segregate them for different actions."
"While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support."
"What could be improved in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for the synthetic jobs or synthetic agents, in particular, you can't do a lot of tests with just one agent. You have to install a lot of agents if you want to do more tests, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that you're only able to see basic metrics in the absence of server or database visibility. For the SaaS version of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring, my team just downloaded then installed the extension in an application in Azure to see the application on the controller, so if this can be done in the on-premise version of the solution as well, without needing to install the agent on the machine, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring better. Currently, the .NET agent consumes the CPU or memory and clients usually raise this issue with my team, so it would be good if the on-premises version doesn't require agent installation on the machine. Another functionality I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for it to receive updates from the file config without needing to reset IIS because right now when you do a modification in IIS, you have to restart IIS. When you add a service to the agent config, you have to restart IIS. For the product server, it's not possible to reset IIS after you make changes to the config file, so if this could be improved, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a better solution."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"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."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
More AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is ranked 22nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 14 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is rated 8.2, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring writes "End-to-end visibility, feature-rich, but the support could be improved". 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 Browser Real-User Monitoring is most compared with Elastic Observability, New Relic and AWS X-Ray, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring 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.
