We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring 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."It provides a lot of data, so it helps businesses identify their user base."
"One noteworthy feature is user journey analysis, which enables tracking user interactions and conversion paths on a website."
"It is a stable solution that helps address user issues well."
"The most valuable feature is that we can see how our end-users are interacting with our application across regions."
"We used AppDynamics to identify gaps and bottlenecks in the software."
"We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring provides smooth connectivity to different applications."
"The best feature of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that it lets you find errors in synthetic jobs ahead of the users. The solution shows you all front-end metrics. You can also see JavaScript errors and jQuery errors through AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring. You can also do a correlation between the front end and the backend, or from the user to the navigator, to the backend through the solution."
"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 has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"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."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"The product's readymade templates are perfect. It supports us a lot when we don't have much experience with the product. The templates offers us direction to proceed."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring needs to offer an end-to-end experience, including the internet layer and third-party elements that come into play on websites."
"The pricing falls within the mid-range category."
"I would like to see support for mobile testing and mobile monitoring."
"The interface and user experience could be better."
"We would like to be able to easily use this solution to monitor our Java script based browsers, which are currently blocked by the security settings."
"What could be improved in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for the synthetic jobs or synthetic agents, in particular, you can't do a lot of tests with just one agent. You have to install a lot of agents if you want to do more tests, so this is an area for improvement in the solution. Another area for improvement in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that you're only able to see basic metrics in the absence of server or database visibility. For the SaaS version of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring, my team just downloaded then installed the extension in an application in Azure to see the application on the controller, so if this can be done in the on-premise version of the solution as well, without needing to install the agent on the machine, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring better. Currently, the .NET agent consumes the CPU or memory and clients usually raise this issue with my team, so it would be good if the on-premises version doesn't require agent installation on the machine. Another functionality I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for it to receive updates from the file config without needing to reset IIS because right now when you do a modification in IIS, you have to restart IIS. When you add a service to the agent config, you have to restart IIS. For the product server, it's not possible to reset IIS after you make changes to the config file, so if this could be improved, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a better solution."
"I would like to have customizable dashboards to use when I am monitoring certain applications."
"While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support."
"Direct integration with an SMS gateway for sending critical alerts to the support SME. This will help customer investing in third party middleware solutions for SMS."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"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."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"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."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
More AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 14 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is rated 8.2, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring writes "End-to-end visibility, feature-rich, but the support could be improved". 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". AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is most compared with Elastic Observability, New Relic and AWS X-Ray, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring 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.