We performed a comparison between Devo and OpenText Operations Bridge based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Operations Analytics solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The user interface is really modern. As an end-user, there are a lot of possibilities to tailor the platform to your needs, and that can be done without needing much support from Devo. It's really flexible and modular. The UI is very clean."
"The user experience [is] well thought out and the workflows are logical. The dashboards are intuitive and highly customizable."
"Being able to build and modify dashboards on the fly with Activeboards streamlines my analyst time because my analysts aren't doing it across spreadsheets or five different tools to try to build a timeline out themselves. They can just ingest it all, build a timeline out across all the logging, and all the different information sources in one dashboard. So, it's a huge time saver. It also has the accuracy of being able to look at all those data sources in one view. The log analysis, which would take 40 hours, we can probably get through it in about five to eight hours using Devo."
"The ability to have high performance, high-speed search capability is incredibly important for us. When it comes to doing security analysis, you don't want to be doing is sitting around waiting to get data back while an attacker is sitting on a network, actively attacking it. You need to be able to answer questions quickly. If I see an indicator of attack, I need to be able to rapidly pivot and find data, then analyze it and find more data to answer more questions. You need to be able to do that quickly. If I'm sitting around just waiting to get my first response, then it ends up moving too slow to keep up with the attacker. Devo's speed and performance allows us to query in real-time and keep up with what is actually happening on the network, then respond effectively to events."
"The most powerful feature is the way the data is stored and extracted. The data is always stored in its original format and you can normalize the data after it has been stored."
"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."
"Devo provides a multi-tenant, cloud-native architecture. This is critical for managed service provider environments or multinational organizations who may have subsidiaries globally. It gives organizations a way to consolidate their data in a single accessible location, yet keep the data separate. This allows for global views and/or isolated views restricted by access controls by company or business unit."
"The most useful feature for us, because of some of the issues we had previously, was the simplicity of log integrations. It's much easier with this platform to integrate log sources that might not have standard logging and things like that."
"The event correlation is the most valuable aspect of the solution."
"I've found the solution to be very scalable."
"The most valuable feature is that everything can be consolidated into one dashboard."
"It's a very good product overall."
"It has the capability to display overall health of the infrastructure and is very useful for executive reports on the health of the infrastructure."
"It is stable."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to integrate with everything."
"It has greatly reduced the number and duration of outages as support teams are notified immediately when something goes wrong or even before something breaks."
"Some of the documentation could be improved a little bit. A lot of times it doesn't go as deep into some of the critical issues you might run into. They've been really good to shore us up with support, but some of the documentation could be a little bit better."
"I would like to have the ability to create more complex dashboards."
"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."
"The price is one problem with Devo."
"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."
"Some third-parties don't have specific API connectors built, so we had to work with Devo to get the logs and parse the data using custom parsers, rather than an out-of-the-box solution."
"There's room for improvement within the GUI. There is also some room for improvement within the native parsers they support. But I can say that about pretty much any solution in this space."
"We only use the core functionality and one of the reasons for this is that their security operation center needs improvement."
"The latest versions of the service reporting dashboards need improvement, such as service modeling."
"The solution is overall "heavy", requiring multiple servers, even without HA."
"Reporting has to be tackled a bit more. Conceptually, it is there and conceptually it is amazing, but somehow the module itself is suffering."
"In a future release, we would like an improved upgrade process. When you upgrade it now, it first uninstalls everything and then reinstalls all the packages, which means any customization that you've done in the directories on the surface disappears."
"Installing and upgrading the HPOM and Operations Agent software is not always easy and the process can be quite fragile. Once it is running, it is very quick and stable, but an upgrade can quite easily break something or terminate unexpectedly."
"The initial setup of this tool is complex for people who lack experience with it."
"I'm not aware of areas that need improvement."
"The price is quite expensive, and because of this, we may try another solution."
Devo is ranked 3rd in IT Operations Analytics with 21 reviews while OpenText Operations Bridge is ranked 10th in IT Operations Analytics with 44 reviews. Devo is rated 8.4, while OpenText Operations Bridge is rated 7.8. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Operations Bridge writes "Good event correlation capabilities, promotes a self-service approach to monitoring". Devo is most compared with Splunk Enterprise Security, Microsoft Sentinel, IBM Security QRadar, Wazuh and LogRhythm SIEM, whereas OpenText Operations Bridge is most compared with SCOM, OpsRamp, BMC Helix Monitor, Splunk Enterprise Security and IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus. See our Devo vs. OpenText Operations Bridge report.
See our list of best IT Operations Analytics vendors.
We monitor all IT Operations Analytics 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.
