We performed a comparison between OpenText Business Process Monitoring and OpenText Real User Monitoring 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."The stability has been very good over the years."
"Automates processes and allows reports and statistics to improve the speed at which changes and assets are managed."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"Very easy to implement."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The solution should offer better integration with other tools from a service management perspective."
"Product documentation is lacking, and sometimes, incorrect. Having better documentation will allow business analysts and data center personnel to rely on the Micro Focus help desk less."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"Some issues with login errors."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely."
"Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic. There is currently no visibility in that channel."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Business Process Monitoring is ranked 57th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 45th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. OpenText Business Process Monitoring is rated 8.0, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of OpenText Business Process Monitoring writes "Stable with good performance visibility but is a discontinued product". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". OpenText Business Process Monitoring is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics and Datadog, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications.
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.
