BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

BMC TrueSight Operations Ma...
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
16th
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
50
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (1st), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (19th), Cloud Monitoring Software (16th), AIOps (9th)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
27th
Average Rating
7.6
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of June 2024, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of BMC TrueSight Operations Management is 1.1%, up from 1.0% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.2%, down from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
Unique Categories:
Event Monitoring
14.5%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
1.0%
No other categories found
 

Featured Reviews

Danny Quezada - PeerSpot reviewer
Jul 13, 2023
Helps to monitor servers, databases, Windows, Linux, and web services
I use the solution to monitor servers, databases, Windows, Linux, and web services.  The solution helps my customer monitor the Oracle database for logs.  The solution should improve predicting events and flaws in service. It also needs to improve integration with other systems.  I have been…
Ahmed  Sobhy - PeerSpot reviewer
May 11, 2023
Easy To Use with a very Good capabilities in monitoring the URLS and APIs
The Reports and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement. dashboarding has some limitations,when we're trying to create a performance dashboard on the OBM. we can't Export our reports on PDF or HTML Format , you have to access the Reports Directly from the SiteScope I think Reports and dashboards are area for improvements on the SiteScope. Also there is no Web UI for accessing and managing the SiteScope , you have to use the SiteScope Local Client . We have installed two SiteScope servers for managing 2 different sites ,it will be perfect if it has one management UI. I consider the Agentless technique is a Pros and corns in the same time as we have to open a lot of ports such like WMi , snmp and ping on all Monitored servers.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"I use the solution to monitor servers, databases, Windows, Linux, and web services."
"The event management tool builds correlation logic and protection algorithms into a field of events that is valuable when a data center goes down."
"I like the event management part."
"The Event Management is outstanding; still is the most interesting part of the product."
"The most valuable features are the rich reports, high performance, and the look and feel of the WebEx webpage are very good."
"Valuable features include wide support for monitoring, strong event management, service management capability, baselining (analytics) and easy to integrate other tools with it."
"The most beneficial part of the product in terms of IT monitoring revolves around the areas involving automation, and it also serves as an end-to-end event management and incident management tool."
"Its event management capabilities are very open and flexible. I haven't seen a use case scenario with a customer that we couldn't actually solve the problem for, so it's really good. There are some interesting things that happen in an enterprise network (things that people don't normally expect), and the event management product is very flexible. You can solve problems as far as your imagination can go with it."
"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."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"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."
 

Cons

"This solution is lacking in application monitoring features. Technical support for this solution also needs improvement, particularly in product knowledge and response time."
"I think the ease of deployment needs to be looked at. It would be great if the deployment was faster and easier."
"Deployment requires lots of resources (servers). It has too many consoles."
"We have a unique use case because BMC typically sells this solution into enterprises that are deploying it within their IT, versus to a managed services provider like us where we're supporting thousands of customers. Multi-tenancy and the scalability have been challenges along the way, as we've grown... If anything could have gone better as we were ramping this up and adding a lot of volume to it, I would say it's the scalability. That would be one thing that could be improved."
"We were somewhat limited in TrueSight due to some of the RBAC controls not quite being what we wanted as far as delegating out administrative privileges for implementation. But because we were able to turn requests around pretty well, that burden wasn't too heavy."
"I definitely would like to see more improvement in the self-diagnostics. I need to know when anything is not working or collecting, long before our customer finds it."
"Cost is an issue with BMC TrueSight Operations Management."
"The UI for the end users could be improved and more flexible than it is now."
"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."
"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."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"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."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"Pricing is all volume-driven. I think we were paying between $80 and $85 per license. That's per unit, for a perpetual license. You pay it one time and then, every year, you pay 20 percent of that for annual maintenance and support. But now that we've grown, we've purchased tens of thousands of licenses and the cost per license has gone down to something like less than $30..."
"We did a five-year, multimillion dollar deal."
"Pricing is very high."
"Use conservative figures. In terms of hardware, monitored servers and also effort. The product is not cheap. But as with other products, you get what you pay for."
"The tool is moderately expensive."
"It is a relatively inexpensive solution."
"The solution is based on endpoints and knowledge models which can be costly."
"The only possible additional cost that I can mention, that you might not be aware of, is that it uses Oracle partitioning, if you use Oracle. There are Oracle partitioning fees that go with that."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"It is expensive. I don't like its licensing. I don't like anything where you have to license it by individual licenses. I'm not a fan of that, but that's just me."
"The product's pricing should be lower since there are many open-source products that can do the same job with better user interfaces. The tool's pricing is yearly and you need to pay for support."
"The pricing or licensing cost for Micro Focus SiteScope is often bundled with other things, so the cost for each individual would be difficult to calculate. Pricing could be $2,000,000 a year. My company pays for technical support because it's part of the contract with Micro Focus SiteScope. You buy the licenses, but you're also paying for the support. With Nagios, it's much more bare-bones as far as paying for licenses and the software itself, and my company didn't have to use as much Nagios support yet in one or two years because there weren't too many problems using Nagios, and it's much more cost-effective, so that's one of the reasons why my company is migrating to Nagios from Micro Focus SiteScope."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
22%
Computer Software Company
13%
Government
9%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Financial Services Firm
30%
Manufacturing Company
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
The solution provides visibility to our infrastructure, how it is, the resources we are monitoring, and quick updates when it has any problems. We have integrated it with ServiceNow to open instances.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
Though I have no clue about the tool's actual price, I know that it is astronomical.
What needs improvement with BMC TrueSight Operations Management?
Cost is an issue with BMC TrueSight Operations Management. Though I am not responsible for the budget, I know that it is an expensive tool set when used only for event management. The tool's issue ...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
I would rate the pricing of SiteScope as a five out of ten in terms of costliness. It is not overly expensive, but there is room for improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness in some areas.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
In terms of improvement, OpenText SiteScop could become a better solution by adding more monitoring templates, like RedScope, to make it easier to track specific technologies. It should also improv...
 

Also Known As

ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations Management
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Learn More

 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Ensono, Transamerica, Boston Scientific, Park Place Technologies, inContact, TD Ameritrade, PNC Bank
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: May 2024.
787,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.