We performed a comparison between OpenText SiteScope and Splunk Enterprise Security 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."The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"It helps us uncover bottlenecks in the network."
"Positive features include replication capabilities, software development kits, and the architecture."
"The product provides visibility and enables us to correlate data and generate alerts."
"The most valuable features of Splunk Enterprise Security are its high-performance data collection, flexible query language, and its versatility across the organization."
"The solution is very fast and succinct."
"On the cloud, we are pushing through less than half a petabyte of data. So far, it has been fairly stable because it runs on all the underlying AWS infrastructures."
"The stock analysts and security people use one single dashboard (one single location) to check our logs."
"Great platform with user-friendly interface and GUI."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"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."
"The product was designed for security and IT with business intelligence needs, such as PDF exporting, but this has not been the highest priority. While the functionality is there, it could be developed more."
"In terms of the interface, it could include some improvements for the look and feel."
"For on-premise, it's more about optimization. With such a heavy byte scale of data that we are operating on, the search for disparate data sometimes takes about a minute. This is understandable considering the amount of data that we are pumping into it. The only optimization that I recommend is better sharding, when it comes to Splunk, so that data retrieval can be faster."
"It is a challenge to manage the environment in such a way, that one’s log, even with the bandwidth license, isn’t exceeded."
"There are new services which are coming up. If Splunk can catch up with the speed of Amazon, and with the integration, instead of us waiting for another year or so, that would be good."
"Splunk needs to be able to hold more days of data. At the moment it only holds three months of data."
"I haven't found a way for me to create my own plugins and integrate them into Splunk, but this isn't necessarily a limitation; it could simply be a lack of knowledge on my part."
"Splunk does not build apps. They only go back and validate the apps that somebody has already built. They should have remote consulting support. They have a wonderful solution. They have 24/7 security. Nobody needs to depend on any third party and will therefore just buy Splunk on the cloud."
OpenText SiteScope is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews while Splunk Enterprise Security is ranked 2nd in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 221 reviews. OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6, while Splunk Enterprise Security is rated 8.4. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk Enterprise Security writes "It has a drag-and-drop interface, so you don't need to know SQL or Java to construct a query ". OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Azure Monitor, whereas Splunk Enterprise Security is most compared with Wazuh, Dynatrace, IBM Security QRadar, Elastic Security and Microsoft Sentinel. See our OpenText SiteScope vs. Splunk Enterprise Security report.
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.