We performed a comparison between Broadcom DX Application Performance Management 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."WAS GC monitoring enhanced our application performance and DB SQL performance."
"Product performance is awesome. It's covering all aspects of the application; good database metrics and internal application metrics. Just tons and tons of data."
"Service maturity when you can retrieve the normal metrics for every major aspect of each module and delivering this info to the correct eyes."
"In terms of stability, it has been stable so far."
"Crash analytics goes down to the level of code you need to check."
"Gives us the ability to know how our application is performing in real-time."
"The deep-process instrumentation gave us an opportunity to understand application process performance in detail."
"Scalable, stable, and easy to deploy APM tool which effectively monitors code-level visibility."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"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 can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"As applications move to the cloud, we need more cloud-based solutions from CA APM. This is currently unavailable."
"The front-end representation should match other competitors such as AppDynamics."
"Stability could actually be helped because it is a wrapper or an agent on our system. If we are having a bad day in production or if other resources are being utilized, then we will get get gaps in our monitoring system."
"The APM SQL feature doesn't perform like we would like it to. I know that's a new feature with 10.5, so it may be one of those things that gets a little better, but it should run faster."
"The area of improvement is related to the areas of application onboarding and instrumentation, where the product has certain shortcomings."
"Broadcom DX Application Performance Management could improve its supportability to the current technologies and the end-to-end correlation feature should be done automatically without custom configurations. Additionally, there should not be any configuration changes to the client-side when deploying the solution."
"Needs the ability to dynamically create dashboards. Right now, we do custom dashboards. Everything is created manually."
"It doesn't have a proper database, and the configuration is very difficult."
"They have not kept up with browser security requirements or advances in GUIs, they switched to a corruptible database architecture instead of text config files."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"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."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
More Broadcom DX Application Performance Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 161 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is rated 8.0, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Broadcom DX Application Performance Management writes "Provides efficiency in migration and DAW but requires a high level of administrator knowledge for configuration". 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". Broadcom DX Application Performance Management is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, VMware Aria Operations for Applications, BMC TrueSight Operations Management and New Relic, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our Broadcom DX Application Performance Management 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.