"It is about finding operational problems. When sites go down, we try to determine who is at fault. While there is not much finger-pointing, the solution is just trying to analyse when there is an outage and where do we start looking to fix it. The very nature of why organization chooses to use the solution is to accelerate the meantime to resolution and find where problems lie to get them rectified as quickly as possible."
"For us, the most valuable feature is something called TWAMP that allows for real-time traffic in a way that is 10 times lighter than things like SolarWinds. It's in the sub-milliseconds of accuracy, and you can divide tasks so that you can literally see things like the tagging for Quality of Service. That had been incorrect with the carrier, but there was no way on this planet you'd be able to tell a carrier that they're wrong. I have dozens of scenarios where we found "No, that's not right," and got it resolved instantly."
"The solution’s UI and single pane of glass is good. The new dashboard is modern with its new design. The look of it is not pretty, but it is efficient, which is good. It is user-friendly; you can find what you need on the interface quickly."
"This solution has helped to improve the interaction between our network, datacenter, and application teams. I have used other tools, but this tool can pinpoint the root cause of my application or network issue in the majority of the cases. So, it helps different divisions or groups in the IT department to troubleshoot together and get an issue resolved. This tool helps a lot in our day-to-day networking application and IT operations."
"The solution is quite stable."
"Azure Monitor is very stable."
"We like this searchability and availability of the data."
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"The most valuable feature is that it ensures our servers are up."
"Azure Monitor is really just a source for Dynatrace. It's just collecting data and monitoring the environment and the infrastructure. It is fairly good at that."
"The most valuable feature is that it's stable. It hasn't crossed any thresholds."
"It needs the possibility to export data because it is not easy to see larger data sets, e.g., for one month. It would be interesting to export data into a PDF or dashboard to keep a history of the situation."
"For the PVX, they are in the process of getting the results to export to cloud and SaaS for analytics. They told me that this will happen later this year. Right now, for the most part, I create that data myself."
"I would like to see some improvements in parts of their synthetic transactions, which includes all the latency, jitter, and throughput. I would like to see some Layer 7 analytics in there. I want to be able to do a DNS request, HTTP GET request, or even SIP call point-to-point or via registration."
"Some of the Skylight applications are a little newer, and they're still moving through initial revs. There are certain bugs, but nothing is insurmountable... It will just take a little bit of time for their user interface to get a little bit better."
"The troubleshooting logs need improvement. There should be some improvement there. I have a hard time finding the right logs at the right times whenever there is an issue occurring."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"When something goes down, we want the option to have automation in place to get it back up again as quickly as possible."
"Automation related to gathering metrics from more applications could be improved."
"I'd like the solution to do more around vulnerability assessment. It's lacking in the product right now."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"Lacks information including details related to where problems lie."
Earn 20 points
Accedian Skylight is ranked 12th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 4 reviews while Azure Monitor is ranked 8th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 9 reviews. Accedian Skylight is rated 9.0, while Azure Monitor is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of Accedian Skylight writes "Solves network issues quickly, saving engineering time". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "Requires out of the box monitoring, real-time monitoring, and better network mapping". Accedian Skylight is most compared with ThousandEyes, SolarWinds NPM, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, Dynatrace and Netrounds, whereas Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Splunk, Dynatrace, New Relic APM and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor. See our Accedian Skylight vs. Azure Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Management (APM) vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Management (APM) 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.
