We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and OpenText SiteScope based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."IBM's main value lies in its integration with its own technologies, which can be seen as a benefit in environments where IBM products are extensively used."
"The solution is very stable. We never had any issues with stability."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The installation process is difficult, requiring continuous support and specialist expertise due to our limited knowledge of managing it effectively."
"The user interface was not good."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
More IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is ranked 53rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 2 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is rated 6.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager writes "Integrates well with IBM technologies, but it's outdated and lacks essential features". 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". IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager is most compared with Dynatrace, IBM Application Performance Management, Azure Monitor and ITRS Geneos, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management.
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.