We performed a comparison between InfoVista 5View NetFlow 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."InfoVista 5View NetFlow allows us to control the application layer and manage API connections, i.e. Facebook logins or whatever other third-party API services we require."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"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's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"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."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"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."
"A little bit better documentation on the details is needed because this subject is not easy sometimes to understand, which limits the capability of the software."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."
"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."
"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."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
Earn 20 points
InfoVista 5View NetFlow is ranked 61st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. InfoVista 5View NetFlow is rated 0.0, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of InfoVista 5View NetFlow writes "Great for service discovery and load balancing and enables us to monitor the traffic flow". 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". InfoVista 5View NetFlow is most compared with Catchpoint, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, SCOM, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management.
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.
