Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aternity AppInternals [EOL] vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

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

Categories and Ranking

Aternity AppInternals [EOL]
Average Rating
8.2
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText SiteScope
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.5
Number of Reviews
28
Ranking in other categories
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability (25th)
 

Featured Reviews

PJ
Points out the relevant problems in the enterprise and it's easy to understand
The most valuable aspect of this solution is the integration with their other systems. It's easy to understand and it points out the relevant problems in the enterprise I would like for it to have automated updates, the way the product updates itself should be all automated, as opposed to what it…
Gyanesh Rahatekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Achieve seamless incident response with valuable monitoring capabilities and reliable alerts
There are multiple features related to OpenText SiteScope monitoring that I have found to be very useful, such as SSL monitoring. If SSL is present as a file in a server, then OpenText SiteScope is a very effective tool to monitor when that certificate expires. It provides comprehensive information related to SSL certificates and log monitoring. If any kind of required keyword monitoring is present in the log file, OpenText SiteScope has excellent functionality for monitoring. It is very easy to configure and obtain the correct information related to end-user requirements. The agentless monitoring feature of OpenText SiteScope is particularly impressive and easy to configure and gather information from. According to the operations team perspective, there is no impact related to resource management from the agentless monitoring. It demonstrates very low resource consumption related to its functionality.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"Clicks to root cause - fast & easy to diagnose and deep-dive"
"Transaction Tracing is the most useful. Being able to have the transaction stitched together so we can see where the problem is has proven invaluable."
"Synthetic transactions, WMI and SNMP query capability."
"Browsermetrix, which is real-user monitoring via JS injection and linked back to TTW via cookie. It allows us to see the experience of every user hitting our sites and analyze performance by region, browser, etc."
"As an Administrator, before we bought this AppInternals, I didn't have visibility on why items were slow or why an application was not running. This gives us the ability to see what's going on. The application is load balancing. We can now see if its own server has issues or just one specific server has issues."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the integration with their other systems. It's easy to understand and it points out the relevant problems in the enterprise."
"I like it that one can match IPs with the application name."
"We just control on the backend of AppInternals what we want to instrument and what we don't want to instrument."
"Instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence. It allows me to create scripts and automate several processes, making tasks simpler and more efficient."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"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 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."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
 

Cons

"The admin dashboard could be easier as it takes a little bit of time to get used to it."
"Support for PHP, DB and other applications need to be supported."
"They should find a way for report generation from TTW to run quicker."
"The recording mechanism for synthetic transactions could be improved as well."
"I would like for it to have automated updates, the way the product updates itself should be all automated, as opposed to what it is now."
"We have put in a request as an enhancement that we would like to search for items. If we're searching for a URL and we want to know was it a get or was it a post."
"We'd like to be able to find out performance problems on application class and methods."
"The technical support is not very good and should be improved."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"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."
"The interface of OpenText SiteScope needs improvement. It has a Java-based interface, which is slow and could be simplified for better usability."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"There is a need to enhance the reporting feature in OpenText SiteScope. Reporting related to performance information for historical data needs improvement to provide better reporting related to application availability and end node availability."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The licensing model for v9 is better where it is an individual license per server, while v10 licenses are per JVM/ .NET and server instance. The latter model appears to be the model that other APM vendors are using."
"The licensing model is expensive compared to its competitors, but the service it gives to your business, and the data quality, means that it's worth it."
"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."
"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."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"When Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope has introduced approximately eight years ago and there was not very much competition making the price high. However, when comparing the price of Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope now to other tools, they should reduce the price. It is similar to a legacy tool at this point."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"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.
873,209 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
21%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
8%
University
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business1
Midsize Enterprise2
Large Enterprise7
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business8
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise20
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
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?
The licensing scheme for Micro Focus tools is reasonable, and more affordable. It's seen as medium or de-receivable.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The new version D2 has improved with a smart plan UI interface. However, while still using the classic WebTop UI, it looks outdated and not HTML5 compatible. They are currently in progress to migra...
 

Also Known As

SteelCentral AppInternals, OPNET ACE, AppInternals Xpert
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

National Instruments, Allianz
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, Splunk and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability. Updated: October 2025.
873,209 professionals have used our research since 2012.