We performed a comparison between AppDynamics Server Monitoring and Loom Systems based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring."This solution gives us quite good insights that we might otherwise overlook, or it might take a really long time to debug those issues."
"The auto-discovery of the logs is the most valuable feature. It requires minimal configuration, we just need to set up on once and it automatically detects through the code."
"I like Business iQ the most, so far. It has great analytics configurations and I can get real-time updates. We have eCommerce releases every week. So the one use case that I use Business iQ is to compare before and after release performance using AppDynamics."
"What I like most about AppDynamics Server Monitoring is that it's easy to manipulate and easy to implement. All solutions have the same features, but what sets AppDynamics Server Monitoring apart is that it's really quick to implement. AppDynamics Server Monitoring has a great interface. As a developer, it doesn't matter whether it's SolarWinds, Dynatrace, or any APM you're using, but it would matter to the customer. A product must be easy to manipulate or use, for example, AppDynamics Server Monitoring, for the customer, but for developers like my team, there's no pressure, even if a solution requires coding."
"We can view the server activities, including issues in the process, with a single click."
"The solution offers great visibility that allows you to track where errors originated."
"It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I don't see any problems in the solution...The solution's technical support was good."
"Setting up the monitoring agents was straightforward."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"In the next release, I would like to see the configuration of the data and more support for new applications. It should support new languages."
"The one thing that I find it difficult in using AppDynamics is, for any new user, it's not easy for him or her to configure the transactions in AppDynamics because the UI is pretty complex. The configuration is pretty complex for a new, fresh user. They can make the UI simpler, that'll be very helpful for anyone to configure their website in AppDynamics."
"I would like the ability to choose from some pre-defined dashboards and reports because as it is now, you have to define them separately for each implementation."
"If we consider the implementation of alternative solutions, such as Dynatrace, there is a notable difference in the approach to agent-based service monitoring. For instance, Dynatrace employs a single-agent solution, which can pose security concerns. When installing Dynatrace, granting the agent ld pro payload rights is a requirement. In contrast, our solution ensures a more secure approach by not requiring root and administration access. While we currently utilize an agent-based solution, there may be a shift in the next one or two years, possibly with the adoption of Open Telemetry. It's anticipated that many APM vendors, including Dynatrace, may alter their structure or strategy for implementation. However, as of now, the trend is towards an increasing number of implementations daily."
"The configuration is tricky and requires a lot of tools."
"The solution could be more mobile friendly."
"The solution has performance issues after we deploy the agent."
"An area for improvement in AppDynamics Server Monitoring is integration; in particular, it needs a better way to integrate with custom applications such as Siebel CRM. Right now, it's challenging to integrate AppDynamics Server Monitoring with Siebel CRM because it sometimes gives an error and cannot integrate properly."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
More AppDynamics Server Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
AppDynamics Server Monitoring is ranked 19th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 16 reviews while Loom Systems is ranked 57th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews. AppDynamics Server Monitoring is rated 8.2, while Loom Systems is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of AppDynamics Server Monitoring writes "A highly stable and scalable solution that provides real-time information on servers". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". AppDynamics Server Monitoring is most compared with OpsRamp, Zabbix, ITRS Geneos, Nutanix Prism and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
