We performed a comparison between New Relic 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."End-user Synthetics and monitoring are very good."
"The simplicity of the dashboard is very good."
"The product allows the developer to see the actual problems in the applications."
"The pricing is pretty good."
"The most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"To me, the most valuable feature of New Relic APM is the traceability, mainly based on the time travel method, so you get the overall response time, which is pretty helpful for developers and ADR techs looking into issues on a deeper level. New Relic APM is a very good, tailor-made solution."
"It gives insights to non-technical people about what technical issues are most important, how much it impacts customers, and potentially, where we should be targeting our development teams when they have time."
"New Relic's dashboard is nice, and it's reliable. It's also compatible with many services, especially Java and the Python ecosystem."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"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."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"It would be nice if there were pre-made dashboards."
"I would like a feature where I can turn off alerting at a policy level. Thus, when a policy is inactive, I can shut down all of my alerts within the policy."
"There are times when you restart the engines and the servers have a unique ID for the host and you need to remove the server. It is difficult because some are on-premise and others are production hosts. Having downtime is not very good when updating. However, it is not a constant issue."
"The solution should include more detailed reports for SQL database requests."
"We have had issues with our agents going offline."
"The connectivity between legacy and newer cloud applications is not great."
"One thing I'd like to see in any APM, especially New Relic, is the ability to use distributed transactions. When one microservice calls another, it calls another database and microservice. The entire data visualization layer will not be able to correlate from one microservice from end to end and return on that path. Distributed transactions would be a great addition that would make life simpler. Unfortunately, no APM has that end-to-end capability."
"In addition, its difficult to have a predictive tool to see how the application would behave in the future when it basically only shows the historical data."
"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."
"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."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"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."
"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."
New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 151 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. New Relic is rated 8.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing 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". New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Azure Monitor, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Elastic Observability. See our New Relic 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.