We performed a comparison between OpenText SiteScope 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."Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The solution is used for monitoring the hardware inventory. For instance, it helps with the whole operational monitoring view for the company's infrastructure."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"They have great integration with the active directory."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"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 product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"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."
"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."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"The end-user components, including the dashboards, the administration console, and the web console, need to be improved."
"The solution should have more tools for monitoring the cloud engine versus on-premise."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"The price could be improved."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews while SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 77 reviews. OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. 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 SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog 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.
