We performed a comparison between AWS Auto Scaling and SolarWinds AppOptics 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 health check integration feature ensures that the instances are healthy and capable of absorbing traffic, thus serving their purpose effectively."
"The good thing about Autoscaling is that it provides the capacity to minimize downtime. So, it gives you the assurance of stability and robustness within your system."
"When a lot of traffic comes into our organization, the product scales our instances based on our environment’s requirements."
"It helps us to reduce the cost."
"The various scaling options available, such as step scaling, are particularly useful."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it scales automatically without manual intervention based on the metrics we provide."
"The solution helps optimize the cost of the AWS environment."
"The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. When it reaches seventy percent, it sends me an email notification."
"The sum solution, NTA, and DPA."
"I have found the most valuable feature is application performance management."
"The product has a great dashboard."
"Some of the most valuable features of SolarWinds are the topology discovery and network performance analysis."
"The reporting of the solution is very good."
"Technical support is always live and they're supportive."
"The solution's infrastructure scalability and elasticity could be improved."
"AWS Auto Scaling's documentation could be better."
"The billing and cost optimization of the solution could be improved."
"In comparison to other public clouds, the product is costly."
"The speed of the solution must be improved."
"The product’s pricing needs improvement."
"Flexibility in configuring the workload is missing in AWS Auto Scaling."
"It could be cheaper."
"In terms of the technology, I think they need to put some more advanced troubleshooting into SolarWinds, in terms of AI capabilities. That's the next generation, especially in the cases of APIs which have already adopted AI capabilities into their products."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"AppOptics would benefit from having a much more centralized view."
"I would like to see more integration with other tools that are available on the market."
"The integration with Unix services should be a bit more straightforward."
"The implementation needs improvement. It needs to get modernized with the newer cloud scenario in both public and private deployment models."
AWS Auto Scaling is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 18 reviews while SolarWinds AppOptics is ranked 44th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 9 reviews. AWS Auto Scaling is rated 8.8, while SolarWinds AppOptics is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AWS Auto Scaling writes "The product helps reduce costs and avoids interruptions to the customer experience". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds AppOptics writes "Unique features allow consolidating and combing metrics into a single dashboard, but don't monitor mobile solutions". AWS Auto Scaling is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas SolarWinds AppOptics is most compared with Dynatrace, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, Zabbix, New Relic and Datadog. See our AWS Auto Scaling vs. SolarWinds AppOptics 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.
