We performed a comparison between DX Spectrum and VMware Aria Operations for Applications based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The fault management is perfect."
"It does correlation so instead of producing 20 alarms if a site goes down, it only creates one."
"It helps our NetOps group actually handle alarms in a way that lets them see the bigger picture of those alarms, and how they might affect our services. It helps us communicate information about the network state better to services that might be impacted by a specific network condition."
"The containerization of different objects was very helpful in building an org structure. Being able to separately manage your MSP clients with separate visibility was also helpful."
"The most valuable features of DX Spectrum are the comprehensive alerts."
"It has a high-quality graphical interface."
"Stability has been good. We really have not had any issues."
"What I like best is the configuration management functionality."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"No issues with stability."
"For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"The platform is complicated to use."
"The interface is not nice and needs to be improved."
"The product should provide performance management features."
"If they could interact with the MIBs of vendors better, and have a lot more pre-loaded ones, that would be amazing for us right now."
"From the users perspective the looks and feel of dashboards of Spectrum would be easier to use and for understanding as APM will be in 10.5 version which we saw in CA World."
"The solution's stability needs improvement."
"It takes some time to learn how to use this solution."
"For my use case, incident coordination was an area of improvement. The internal software engine for coordinating outages could use improvement because sometimes, we used to get false alerts for unrelated devices. They did a really good job of trying to make sure that you got one major alert and any of the subsequent devices downstream were just additions to that, but occasionally, the engine wouldn't properly catch the right things, and we used to get a flood of alerts."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Spectrum is ranked 16th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 115 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 35th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews. DX Spectrum is rated 8.4, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of DX Spectrum writes "Comprehensive alerts, beneficial overall network viability, and scalability not limited". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". DX Spectrum is most compared with DX NetOps, Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM, Cisco DNA Center and ThousandEyes, whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Grafana, Dynatrace, Datadog, Zabbix and Prometheus. See our DX Spectrum vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.