We performed a comparison between BMC TrueSight Operations Management and Devo based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two AIOps solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Signature baselines, which have allowed us to fine tune many of our events and significantly reduce the number of events generated."
"The solution has a very good business event manager tool."
"I like the event management part."
"What I like best about BMC TrueSight Operations Management is that it allows you to do granular monitoring and improves VM load."
"It works irrespective of the operating system we’re running."
"I use the solution to monitor servers, databases, Windows, Linux, and web services."
"It is a stable solution."
"I like everything about this tool. I recommend this solution to anyone looking for a standalone solution with high availability meaning that can be used depending on the customers requirements."
"The real-time analytics of security-related data are super. There are a lot of data feeds going into it and it's very quick at pulling up and correlating the data and showing you what's going on in your infrastructure. It's fast. The way that their architecture and technology works, they've really focused on the speed of query results and making sure that we can do what we need to do quickly. Devo is pulling back information in a fast fashion, based on real-time events."
"It's very, very versatile."
"Those 400 days of hot data mean that people can look for trends and at what happened in the past. And they can not only do so from a security point of view, but even for operational use cases. In the past, our operational norm was to keep live data for only 30 days. Our users were constantly asking us for at least 90 days, and we really couldn't even do that. That's one reason that having 400 days of live data is pretty huge. As our users start to use it and adopt this system, we expect people to be able to do those long-term analytics."
"The querying and the log-retention capabilities are pretty powerful. Those provide some of the biggest value-add for us."
"The alerting is much better than I anticipated. We don't get as many alerts as I thought we would, but that nobody's fault, it's just the way it is."
"In traditional BI solutions, you need to wait a lot of time to have the ability to create visualizations with the data and to do searches. With this kind of platform, you have that information in real-time."
"The thing that Devo does better than other solutions is to give me the ability to write queries that look at multiple data sources and run fast. Most SIEMs don't do that. And I can do that by creating entity-based queries. Let's say I have a table which has Okta, a table which has G Suite, a table which has endpoint telemetry, and I have a table which has DNS telemetry. I can write a query that says, 'Join all these things together on IP, and where the IP matches in all these tables, return to me that subset of data, within these time windows.' I can break it down that way."
"Devo helps us to unlock the full power of our data because they have more than 450 parsers, which means that we can ingest pretty much any type of log data."
"We were somewhat limited in TrueSight due to some of the RBAC controls not quite being what we wanted as far as delegating out administrative privileges for implementation. But because we were able to turn requests around pretty well, that burden wasn't too heavy."
"The product must provide more AI capabilities."
"In our company, we faced some issues with the solution’s application endpoint, IP, and the physical location of the transactions."
"I would like them to improve the deep-dive details, tracing, and data agents in this product. We have EUEM, an end-user experience monitoring appliance. This one's quicker than the current one, and reporting side and filtration side are very bad. There are many details we look at and explain what we receive information in the current one, but we cannot have historical data like we do with EUEM. We cannot have a powerful point to look for specific traffic from a specific application and a specific browser. We don't have it in the new one. The current BMC also needs to add the thing that control versions."
"Reporting would be an area for improvement in TrueSight... We have almost 800 customers today on TrueSight and just under 10,000 assets. We need to be able to give a customer some information. If the customer's product fails, they'll ask us, "Did it have a problem beforehand?" We have all those events and we know all the problems it had beforehand. We have to be able to give them access to that kind of reporting. That's an enhancement that we need."
"The sizing (which is difficult), the maintenance of it and the upgrade paths. This is a difficult area which is not easy to cover, as every client has a different approach of implementing the product."
"It would be better if the initial setup and deployment were more straightforward."
"There are some small limitations with this tool in terms of reporting dashboards that fit all of the requirements of the individual customer."
"Some basic reporting mechanisms have room for improvement. Customers can do analysis by building Activeboards, Devo’s name for interactive dashboards. This capability is quite nice, but it is not a reporting engine. Devo does provide mechanisms to allow third-party tools to query data via their API, which is great. However, a lot of folks like or want a reporting engine, per se, and Devo simply doesn't have that. This may or may not be by design."
"The Activeboards feature is not as mature regarding the look and feel. Its functionality is mature, but the look and feel is not there. For example, if you have some data sets and are trying to get some graphics, you cannot change anything. There's just one format for the graphics. You cannot change the size of the font, the font itself, etc."
"Their documentation could be better. They are growing quickly and need to have someone focused on tech writing to ensure that all the different updates, how to use them, and all the new features and functionality are properly documented."
"The overall performance of extraction could be a lot faster, but that's a common problem in this space in general. Also, the stock or default alerting and detecting options could definitely be broader and more all-encompassing. The fact that they're not is why we had to write all our own alerts."
"From our experience, the Devo agent needs some work. They built it on top of OS Query's open-source framework. It seems like it wasn't tuned properly to handle a large volume of Windows event logs. In our experience, there would definitely be some room for improvement. A lot of SIEMs on the market have their own agent infrastructure. I think Devo's working towards that, but I think that it needs some improvement as far as keeping up with high-volume environments."
"There is room for improvement in the ability to parse different log types. I would go as far as to say the product is deficient in its ability to parse multiple, different log types, including logs from major vendors that are supported by competitors. Additionally, the time that it takes to turn around a supported parser for customers and common log source types, which are generally accepted standards in the industry, is not acceptable. This has impacted customer onboarding and customer relationships for us on multiple fronts."
"One major area for improvement for Devo... is to provide more capabilities around pre-built monitoring. They're working on integrations with different types of systems, but that integration needs to go beyond just onboarding to the platform. It needs to include applications, out-of-the-box, that immediately help people to start monitoring their systems. Such applications would include dashboards and alerts, and then people could customize them for their own needs so that they aren't starting from a blank slate."
"Where Devo has room for improvement is the data ingestion and parsing. We tend to have to work with the Devo support team to bring on and ingest new sources of data."
More BMC TrueSight Operations Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 9th in AIOps with 48 reviews while Devo is ranked 10th in AIOps with 21 reviews. BMC TrueSight Operations Management is rated 8.2, while Devo is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Devo writes "Keeps 400 days of hot data, covers our cloud products, and has a high ingestion rate and super easy log integrations". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with BMC Helix Monitor, Dynatrace, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Zabbix and New Relic, whereas Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM. See our BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. Devo report.
See our list of best AIOps vendors.
We monitor all AIOps 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.
