"The VPN is one of the solution's most valuable features for us."
"The simplicity of the dashboard is very good."
"It does everything we wanted it to do."
"The stability of New Relic APM is very good."
"The most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"Working with the solution is very easy. It's user-friendly."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to receive in-depth information about applications. It can detect a lot of important information."
"The breakdown of the response time of different components and getting in-depth details of the slow component are the most valuable features. It is easy to use, and it gets the job done."
"The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good."
"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."
"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."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"It offers all the core capabilities we need to manage and monitor our Azure services."
"Service Bus topic subscription monitoring turned out to be the most useful for us."
"There has been some problem with the agent, and it is just not working well. It is not able to record information with the application server. They have been able to fix the issue, but it took quite a long time. This is the main issue in the APM products and also in New Relic. The mobile application monitoring has been pretty difficult to set up and also quite expensive. It should be a little bit easier and cheaper. Because it is pretty difficult and expensive, many customers don't take it."
"The solution could improve by having more network monitoring features, such as for all the infrastructure."
"They should bring the pricing down to be more competitive."
"The older view is much better than the new view that they have. We'd like to go back to that previous version. The user interface just isn't as nice as it used to be."
"It would be nice if there were pre-made dashboards."
"I haven't come across any features that are lacking."
"How granular I could go down at looking at certain data, especially related to the operations, is limited."
"It is very difficult to award the service level cycles at an endpoint level."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"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."
"Addition of more monitoring features to Azure Cosmos DB can be a huge help as we use the same as the main database for our applications."
"The user interface of Serveress360 could be improved a bit to make the platform even easier to use."
Micro Focus SiteScope is ranked 14th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 6 reviews while Serverless360 is ranked 28th in Application Performance Management (APM) with 2 reviews. Micro Focus SiteScope is rated 6.8, while Serverless360 is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Micro Focus 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Serverless360 writes "Centralized, great for performing corrective actions and has a helpful Business Activity Monitoring module ". Micro Focus SiteScope is most compared with Dynatrace, Splunk, AppDynamics, SCOM and InfoVista 5View NetFlow, whereas Serverless360 is most compared with Azure Monitor. See our Micro Focus SiteScope vs. Serverless360 report.
See our list of best Application Performance Management (APM) vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Management (APM) 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.
