We performed a comparison between OpenText SiteScope and Scout APM 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."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."
"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's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"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."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"The product can scale."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"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."
"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."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"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 should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"I can't recall coming across any missing features."
OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews while Scout APM is ranked 32nd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 1 review. OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6, while Scout APM is rated 10.0. 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". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Scout APM writes "Great visibility and reliability with fair pricing". OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas Scout APM is most compared with Zabbix, Datadog, Prometheus, New Relic and Grafana.
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.