We performed a comparison between DX SaaS and OpenText SiteScope 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."DX allows you to customize and gives you a high degree of control."
"Actionable insight is the most valuable feature."
"It supports numerous platforms."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The ability to scale presents a challenge as the cost of handling vast amounts of data in the cloud must be taken into account."
"DX SaaS is a latecomer to the APM market. Some things that are straightforward in Dynatrace are complicated in DX. For example, upgrading the agents is a seamless process in Dynatrace, but it's a pain in DX SaaS. You should be able to upgrade in the Application Command Center. However, it is not working correctly."
"Old user interface and dashboards could be improved."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Direct integration with an SMS gateway for sending critical alerts to the support SME. This will help customer investing in third party middleware solutions for SMS."
"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
DX SaaS is ranked 49th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 3 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. DX SaaS is rated 6.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of DX SaaS writes "It's highly customizable but lacks many features of available in competing solutions". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". DX SaaS is most compared with DX Unified Infrastructure Management, Zabbix, Nagios XI and Dynatrace, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our DX SaaS vs. OpenText SiteScope 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.