We performed a comparison between OpenText Real User Monitoring and SCOM 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."Very easy to implement."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"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 technical support is good at resolving issues."
"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 reporting feature is good for us."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"It's easy to use."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"The solution is scalable. If you want to monitor more you have to buy more licenses, but you can add on. We don't plan to increase usage."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is real-time alerts."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"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."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"Some issues with login errors."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"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."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
"System Center just provided upgrade and update features for Windows clients, and Windows systems, and did not support Linux, Android, or iOS, and other operating systems. They need to provide better integration with other operating systems if they don't already."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews while SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 78 reviews. OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics.
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.
