We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and BMC TrueSight Operations Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor is the preferred option due to its ease of setup, low-cost pricing, and integration with other Microsoft technologies. It also provides a more convenient and efficient solution for developers by offering a one-stop place to monitor all cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard. BMC TrueSight Operations Management has valuable features, but needs improvement in areas such as cloud monitoring, reporting dashboards, and pricing.
"We like this searchability and availability of the data."
"For me, the best feature is the log analysis with Azure Monitor's Log Analytics. Without being able to analyze the logs of all the activities that affect the performance of a machine, your monitoring effectiveness will be severely limited."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"It has good troubleshooting features."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"Azure Monitor gives us the observability to check everything that we have in the cloud."
"It's a service from Microsoft, so it will scale."
"I am impressed by the reporting on the average eight ports that we get from this solution."
"It is a stable solution."
"Signature baselines, which have allowed us to fine tune many of our events and significantly reduce the number of events generated."
"The most valuable features are the rich reports, high performance, and the look and feel of the WebEx webpage are very good."
"What I like best about BMC TrueSight Operations Management is that it allows you to do granular monitoring and improves VM load."
"I like the deep-dive detail and end-user metrics data. The synthetic monitor is the best one. The best point of the new one is that there's no need for configuration. You can inject the Java script and start to change major developments in the application. This is a good approach, and we received all the data using this."
"We're using native monitoring capabilities for all our server hardware, for visibility for applications, for URLs, for webpage response and accuracy, and for monitoring network throughput in a lot of particular instances. We're using lightweight protocols for pinging, for DNS, for LDAP."
"It works irrespective of the operating system we’re running."
"It is a very stable product."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"Automation related to gathering metrics from more applications could be improved."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"The length of latency is terrible and needs to be improved."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"Setting up this solution is complex. It's also missing the functionality of assigning alerts."
"It's really complex to retrieve or query the logs in Azure Monitor."
"They should include advanced logging on the database level in the Azure pool."
"The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size. At present, the installation packages can be quite large."
"The solution is overly complex."
"One of the things that the TrueSight environment is missing is some of the HA abilities. The data collection server called the ISM doesn't really have the HA functionality or workload balancing. It was missing from the previous product as well. It's missing redundancy."
"I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies."
"The dashboard and performance graphs should include a way to automatically schedule and export reports."
"It would be better if the initial setup and deployment were more straightforward."
"Specifically around application performance monitoring, BMC is definitely not the market leader. The Dynatraces, the New Relics and the like are more of the market leaders in that space. I would like to see them grow that space a little bit more aggressively. It has not really been their bread and butter."
"The UI for the end users could be improved and more flexible than it is now."
More BMC TrueSight Operations Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 16th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 48 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while BMC TrueSight Operations Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Operations Management writes "The product is reasonably priced, but the solution is a little obsolete because it is deployed on-premise". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Prometheus, Sentry and Grafana, whereas BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with BMC Helix Monitor, Dynatrace, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Zabbix and SCOM. See our Azure Monitor vs. BMC TrueSight Operations Management report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.