We performed a comparison between Cavisson NetDiagnostics and OpenText SiteScope based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."Its end-to-end dashboard provides information on all the integration callouts happening on the server side."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"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 most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"They can improve on providing "help and navigation" for each feature available in 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."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"You can use OpenText SiteScope for small or middle environments. But if you want to monitor a large environment, it is not scalable. If you can monitor a large environment with OpenText SiteScope, it can be a valuable product."
"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."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
Earn 20 points
Cavisson NetDiagnostics is ranked 87th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Cavisson NetDiagnostics is rated 10.0, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cavisson NetDiagnostics writes "Improves our application at the code level because of its different performance metrics". 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". Cavisson NetDiagnostics is most compared with , whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security.
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.