We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability 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."I have built a mini business intelligence system based on Elastic Observability."
"Its diverse set of features available on the cloud is of significant importance."
"It has always been a stable solution."
"For full stack observability, Elastic is the best tool compared with any other tool ."
"Machine learning is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"Elastic APM has plenty of features, such as the Elastic server for Kibana and many additional plugins. It's a comprehensive tool when used as a logging platform."
"We use AppDynamics and Elastic. The reason why we're using Elastic APM is because of the license count. It's very favorable compared to AppDynamics. It's inexpensive; it's economical."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Observability is the text search."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"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."
"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."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"Elastic Observability is difficult to use. There are only three options for customization but this can be difficult for our use case. We do not have other options to choose the metrics shown, such as CPU or memory usage."
"The tool's scalability involves a more complex implementation process. It requires careful calculations to determine the number of nodes needed, the specifications of each node, and the configuration of hot, warm, and cold zones for data storage. Additionally, managing log retention policies adds further complexity. The solution's pricing also needs to be cheaper."
"Elastic Observability’s price could be improved."
"There could be more low-code features included in the product."
"More web features could be added to the product."
"Elastic Observability needs to improve the retrieval of logs and metrics from all the instances."
"If we had some pre-defined templates for observability that we could start using right away after deploying it – instead of having to build or to change some of the dashboards – that would be helpful."
"Elastic Observability needs to have better standardization, logging, and schema."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"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."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"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."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"Sometimes in a huge environment, I think the documentation does not provide the required calculations so you can't know what the required set up should be. You need to test."
Elastic Observability is ranked 7th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 22 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 25th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". 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". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Datadog and Sentry, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Grafana. See our Elastic Observability 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.