Real User Monitor needs to cover more protocols to provide more in-depth information. It could also be better at monitoring voice-related traffic.  There is currently no visibility in that channel.  

This solution needs to be more lightweight.

It requires that you purchase a Microsoft or Oracle database, which adds extra costs.

This product still uses Java, which has been removed from most of the browsers and it requires an additional install step for the client.

You need to purchase a lot of extra products from Micro Focus because the integration with them is required before you get a final, working solution.

It is an old design that has not changed in the past ten years, other than the name of it.

It takes 20 to 30 minutes to start the application.

When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported.

Because RUM is based on port sniffing, it means that you need to configure a port on the network or switch. This works fine in an on-premises deployment, but we are moving to the cloud and user monitoring is done differently.

There have been some issues with customers implementing this solution and with login errors, which could be areas for improvement.

They're moving to a new solution called AppPulse, which I just selected. So AppPulse will not just only have the real user monitoring and the synthetic monitoring, they also have a new thing called trace. I have used comparable products to the Trace function.

Everybody is moving away from traffic and installing agents on the application to do the job, but Micro Focus is using traditional ways to collect the traffic. They should change their architecture completely.

One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap. They need to really do a catch-up game with many of their incoming competitors. They actually need to completely revisit their product development strategy and overall product approach, if they wish to remain relevant in the APM market.

This technology is considered to be older. We are using the type of data collection that is mirroring traffic from application servers to Real User Monitor servers. Many other vendors such as AppDynamics, and Dynatrace, are using code injection and the values are more true with code injection. But for the mirroring, or data mirroring, it is not as true.

On the technical side, the data mirroring is easier to configure. The code injection needs development. You have to direct the development team on what to do, for you to use the data. For the data mirroring, you can ask the network team to mirror the application server data to my server. You can get all of the data. it is very easy to configure.

Most of the dashboards require a lot of configuration. We are not happy with the dashboard.

It is simple but you need to do some extra configuration, and you need to know another reporting tool that needs to integrate with. It is very difficult to manage this process 

We would like to see support for non-Windows environments. Right now, we have to use it on a Windows server, but some of our customers don't like this.

I would like to see improvements made in terms of agent-based support. As it is now, we can install an agent on the application server, but it is not recommended for systems that are in production. In our experience, it is a really good option that we can implement for customers that do not want to reconfigure or change their network.