Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more

Micro Focus SiteScope OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Micro Focus SiteScope is #18 ranked solution in APM tools. PeerSpot users give Micro Focus SiteScope an average rating of 6.8 out of 10. Micro Focus SiteScope is most commonly compared to Dynatrace: Micro Focus SiteScope vs Dynatrace. Micro Focus SiteScope is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 73% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 23% of all views.
Micro Focus SiteScope Buyer's Guide

Download the Micro Focus SiteScope Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: September 2022

What is Micro Focus SiteScope?

Micro Focus SiteScope is an agentless monitoring program that tracks the availability and performance of distributed IT infrastructures such as servers, network devices and services, applications and application components, virtualization software, operating systems, and other IT enterprise components.

Micro Focus SiteScope is an autonomous hybrid IT monitoring system that can monitor more than 100 different types of IT components in real time, thanks to a lightweight and highly customizable remote access architecture.

With Micro Focus SiteScope, IT teams can get the data they need to keep on top of problems and eliminate bottlenecks before they become major concerns.

Micro Focus SiteScope can reduce total cost of ownership (TCO) by utilizing agentless technology, which eliminates the need to install and monitor agents on each box. Manual activities can be automated, and teams can save time and effort by using pre-packaged solution templates.

Micro Focus SiteScope Features

Micro Focus SiteScope has many valuable key features. Some of the most useful ones include:

  • Broad functionality built on expertise: Micro Focus SiteScope's architecture is scalable and supports a broad range of functions, including data collecting, alerting, event management, and reporting. Data is collected via remote access, which eliminates the need for agents to be deployed and maintained on monitored nodes. Micro Focus SiteScope connects to systems as a remote user via the central server, which supports JMX, SNMP, HTTP, SSH, NetBIOS, and WMI.
  • Monitors legacy and modern environments: Micro Focus SiteScope comes with more than 100 built-in monitors that track things like utilization, response time, use, and resource availability.

    • Cloud: You can monitor virtual servers and applications on Amazon Web Services (AWS). AWS-hosted applications can provide data to Amazon CloudWatch, which can be used for auto-scaling, reporting, and alerting.

    • Virtualization: Micro Focus SiteScope supports VMware, Microsoft, Citrix, and Oracle/Sun virtualization technologies. Monitor Docker clusters, nodes, containers, and workloads.
  • Flexibility with configuration: By adding or deleting specific monitors, you can adapt to dynamic changes in data center configuration.
  • Templates for solutions: The template database is based on best practices for monitoring complex application settings with the least amount of time and effort. The templates include built-in domain experience of specialized monitors, default metrics and thresholds, proactive testing, and best practices for a given application or monitoring component.
  • Notifications, alerts, and reports: Email, SNMP traps, HTTP post, and database alerts are all supported. Administrators receive alerts based on defined thresholds and schedules.
  • Flexibility in user management: Using LDAP or an internal management solution, define group-level permissions, construct user roles, and assign security groups depending on role. Extensive WS (Web Service)-based API that automates numerous management situations without the need for the SiteScope UI.
  • Integrations with SiteScope: Micro Focus SiteScope not only offers a number of benefits on its own, but it can also be linked with a number of Micro Focus and third-party solutions, giving teams the ability to properly integrate their IT operations center.

Micro Focus SiteScope was previously known as HPE SiteScope, SiteScope.

Micro Focus SiteScope Customers

Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank

Micro Focus SiteScope Video

Archived Micro Focus SiteScope Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Tuncay KALAYCI - PeerSpot reviewer
Managed Services Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Useful for the system environment but integration needs improvement
Pros and Cons
  • "For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
  • "SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL."

What is our primary use case?

Our company manages four different city hospital environments and all of them have SiteScope but each uses a different version depending on how long ago the product was implemented. We're a government organization. 

We use and manage SiteScope monitoring tools in our different projects. Each project has different kinds and numbers of users. For example, one has 2,300 users, but normally we use SiteScope for the servers. Physical and virtual. SiteScope monitors 200 virtual servers in one of our projects. I'm a managed services manager and we're a customer of SiteScope.

What is most valuable?

I can say for the system environment, SiteScope can be useful.It is easy to monitor using WMI protocol to get CPU,Ram and disk status. Also, you can monitor URL. Managing site scope is not as difficult as its reveal. 

What needs improvement?

The tool dashboards are not good and don't meet our customers' needs. Because of this we generally use open source tools like Grafana and we also use Nagios for monitoring as a free tool. We're able to gather gather information from SiteScope or the other network tools like NMI to create a dashboard in Grafana.

When we use the OMI tool as an umbrella, and SiteScope attempts to allow that, the problem is that a technician can only do one alert from OMI. The integration doesn't work properly. We need to see it in both tools and we're unable to do that. Finally, SiteScope isn't productive if you want to monitor RAM or if you want to monitor some URL.

For additional features, I return to the dashboards. Normally Micro Focus has an integration tool, OPR, for the dashboards. It's not useful and it also needs a high source, at least 24 CPU, and at least 96 gigabyte of RAM. I doubt Micro Focus will develop SiteScope dashboards and other tool dashboards because they'll say they have another tool for it, but it's not a useful tool.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for three years. 

Buyer's Guide
Micro Focus SiteScope
September 2022
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus SiteScope. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
636,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We've just had one serious integration problem between two tools, OMI and SiteScope. Other than that, it's been a very stable solution. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We've only carried out minimal scaling over the last two years. We started with 180 servers and are now up to 200. It's not much so it's difficult to judge scalability.

How are customer service and support?

Maybe we were unlucky, but I don't like Micro Focus support very much. Sometimes they are good, sometimes they are bad. It depends on the products and depends on the problem. 

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup is reasonably simple. We've installed four times for the four different projects. It takes a short time to install one tool without any configuration. The configuration takes about a day. 

We do the implementaton ourselves and then our customers deal with maintenance which is done on site. 


What other advice do I have?

People should know that if they only use SiteScope, it won't be enough. They will need to get support from other tools. For example, without HM tools, without network manager tools, it will not work. They won't get the old alerts from their environment and they will be unhappy. SiteScope alone is not enough.

I would rate this product a seven out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
SagarShah1 - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Support Manager at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
System resource monitoring that generates automated alerts and support tickets
Pros and Cons
  • "The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
  • "It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."

What is our primary use case?

We use SiteScope for monitoring of our production systems, system resources, and also some application monitoring.  

What is most valuable?

I think that the product's ability to monitor the systems and applications are the most valuable features. We get alerts over email if there is an issue. We can also use it for our customer support incident and problem management. SiteScope can be integrated to have tickets created automatically when the alert thresholds are breached.  

What needs improvement?

We are evaluating AppDynamics as a potential solution. We want to understand how that compares to and may be better than SiteScope. So I don't know exactly at this time what can be improved, but that is why we are evaluating AppDynamics. We are taking the opportunity to compare the features in both of these products to see if SiteScope measures up to other products in the category.  

At this point in the comparison, I think what I would say AppDynamics does provide one capability that I think SiteScope does not. This is the ability to track a business transaction from the client through all the layers spanning the architecture. So there is more continuity in tracking from the user to the webserver to the database. This might be something that they could consider adding to SiteScope.  

So what I would like to see included most in the next release of SiteScope is the ability to do better transaction tracking. The other thing I would like to see is SiteScope should provide capabilities to display some graphs of information summaries. For example, say if I want to look at the resource utilization of a system or part of a system over a period of time, it would be nice to be able to get a quick preview of that provided in a graph to get a quick idea without a lot of other evaluation.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using it for five years at least, probably more.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

SiteScope is stable. We have absolutely no issues with that.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is easy to scale. We have about one hundred users in our company who are using SiteScope. Most of them are support engineers. I have no idea about the resources needed for maintenance because that is a separate team. The demand and usage are pretty high on a daily basis, but this does not seem to adversely affect performance.  

How are customer service and technical support?

So far our experience with the product has been good enough that we have not had to contact technical support.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We did not have a different solution previously, and at the time we adopted the product we thought that SiteScope was a complete solution. It is not bad, but in the last five years, we learned more about what we might want to see in the product and what is possible with this type of product. As this is the case we are evaluating AppDynamics currently.  

The main reason we are evaluating AppDynamics is because of the capabilities of business transaction tracking through the system. We think that AppDynamics will do this in a more satisfactory way for us and we do not have this feature with SiteScope.  

What other advice do I have?

My advice to other people considering SiteScope as a solution in this category of tools is that I think SiteScope is a good product. It is definitely useful and provides a lot of value. I do not have any other advice in terms of being an end-user because all those things are not a perspective I have on the product.  

In general, I would recommend SiteScope. On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate SiteScope as an eight-out-of-ten.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Private Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Micro Focus SiteScope
September 2022
Learn what your peers think about Micro Focus SiteScope. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: September 2022.
636,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Hani Khalil - PeerSpot reviewer
Service Assurance , Senior Manager at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
A solution with a very good interface, an easy initial setup and good scalability
Pros and Cons
  • "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."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

We are using the solution for many things.

What is most valuable?

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.

The interface is good. It's great for our technical team.

What needs improvement?

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. We have some cases where we need to monitor the vCenters and the whole ESXi, available under this, and VMs. It may impact the server if you don't have the required experience.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is normally stable, but in some environments, it's a bit more complex. For example, in our environment, we have more than 80 services published to the customers. Every day we have new items and new technologies. We have tests to retest, so sometimes when they move to new release, SiteScope itself will not work on it. You need to go to another release or wait for the R&D to provide you with a fix.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution is scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support is good, but not perfect.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward. It's really simple.

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend the product. I would suggest that those considering implementation of the solution need to study their environment first. You need to know what you're going to do before installing SiteScope. Everything needs to be prepared. Communication metrics should be ready. If your communication metrics are not ready, then SiteScope will not work with you. Once you do, however, it will be a piece of cake. Just install it and install the mutation.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Carl Brahms Jr - PeerSpot reviewer
Engineer at United Airlines
Real User
The GUI is cumbersome, and it requires a Java client
Pros and Cons
  • "The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

I have used SiteScope for over 10 years as a synthetic monitor for everything under the sun. 

How has it helped my organization?

The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily.  

We ended up using the "script" monitor the most, because the canned monitors didn't always do what we needed. It was easy enough to use, and the ability to use regex to monitor output in alerts and thresholds made the product very configurable.

What is most valuable?

For host monitoring, agentless monitoring requires no installs or special permissions, just a regular user account on the host and firewall access to SSH, WMI, NetBIOS, etc.  

DBQuery, URL, and Web Service monitoring were also valuable until we started using another tool for real transaction monitoring. Now, we rarely need to setup synthetic monitoring for applications, because we have actual user performance data.

What needs improvement?

It was a great tool for a long time. My go-to tool for everything. However, something happened at HPE years ago and investment in the development of the tool seems to have tanked.  

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, and the licensing is way more expensive than other tools that do the same thing (like LogicMonitor). Monitors have bugs that sit unfixed for multiple versions (file age and SOAP/XML Web Service monitors). The GUI is cumbersome, and it requires a Java client!  

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Yes, some conditions trigger false alerts which is pretty difficult to recover from. The worst thing you can hear is that every monitor is opening a ticket from one server. Another admin built flood limits on the alert receiver side to prevent this issue from creating too many tickets to handle.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I did not see many issues with scalability which did not involve host infrastructure limits.

How are customer service and technical support?

There are some very capable HPE/Micro Focus engineers on the forums, but overall opening a ticket was usually a waste of time for us. Most of the time we would have to figure out the problem ourselves through debug logging. Often, we would have to restore from a backup, in the event the monitor database would get corrupted.

How was the initial setup?

Easy to setup and teach other teammates how to create monitors, templates, etc.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented using an in-house team.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Easy to setup, but I’m not able to recommend this product any longer because there hasn’t been any real investment in enhancements that allow for cloud or container monitoring.   Apparently they no longer charge for solution templates and I’m not sure how they price the tool.  They’ve changed it over the years from “points”, metrics, and monitor count.  Not sure how they are selling this tool these days unless it’s to customers looking for an agentless onprem tool with no need to monitor new technologies.  

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Carl Brahms Jr - PeerSpot reviewer
Carl Brahms JrEngineer at United Airlines
Real User

Ok, I’ve revised my review to reflect what you’ve shared. Thanks.

See all 2 comments
Rakesh Kanojia - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Pre-Sales Consultant / Project Manager (BSM) at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Consultant
It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates
Pros and Cons
  • "SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
  • "Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
  • "It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
  • "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."

What is our primary use case?

Completely agentless solution, i.e., no agent has to be installed on any services for monitoring, hence avoiding any troubleshooting of agents.

How has it helped my organization?

SiteScope is a very flexible solution. The organization where I have implemented this solution allowed us to create custom monitoring to suite the environment. When coupled with OMi and Service Manager, it gives a 360 degree view of the service availability and performance SLAs.

What is most valuable?

SiteScope supports several virtualization technologies (private and public), like AWS, Hyper-V, VMware, etc., without the installation of any extra modules. The dashboard is tablet friendly and supported anywhere on iOS and Android.

It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates (policies). Most importantly, one can even use SiteScope for monitoring application transactions recorded using Vugen.

Finally, SiteScope is available as a container for Docker, which is parts away from the installation & length upgrade procedure.

What needs improvement?

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.

For how long have I used the solution?

More than five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

No. SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No. SiteScope is highly scalable.

How are customer service and technical support?

The support is good. Most importantly, the documentation is well-organized.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Depending on the requirement, we do recommend an agent-based solution. However, our overall first choice is SiteScope.

How was the initial setup?

Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours.

What about the implementation team?

I have implemented the solution myself for several organisations.

What was our ROI?

Not applicable.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing.

For the first time users, it is recommended to make use of the experienced service provided for initial setup as they bring in experience and best practices.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

No.

What other advice do I have?

Go with a small install base (architecture) and gradually scale the solution.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PankajSoni - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Consultant at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
​Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware

What is most valuable?

Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good.

What needs improvement?

  • Complexity in template editing 
  • They should provide more templates for new vendor devices.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

No issues with the tools.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

It fully depends on the costs, customer, and architect.

How was the initial setup?

It was straightforward.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

It depends on what the customer wants.

What other advice do I have?

Before choosing a product, I want to evaluate to check all the requirements. Then, before implementation, check all the customer requirements accordingly. 

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Diego Caicedo Lescano - PeerSpot reviewer
Chief Innovation Officer at SAGGA
Real User
Top 5Leaderboard
Deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP. Any device with any of these protocols will be monitored.
Pros and Cons
  • "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 could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."

How has it helped my organization?

  • Proactive monitoring based on real experience
  • Configuring thresholds for warning events for proactive monitoring and actioning

What is most valuable?

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.

Great monitoring capabilities:  The monitoring capabilities have no limit; whatever you can imagine, you can monitor, even using URL monitors, database query monitors, and formula composite monitors, which are not common in other tools.

Reporting:  You have a lot of reports using different criteria - for example, dates, filters, events, and status - which let you analyze the monitored data, convert it into information and take actions.

Event-based actions: You can simply send an e-mail or take actions like restart the server, restart the service, etc.

Agentless Monitoring

Dynamic Monitoring

Dockers Monitoring

Dependency Configuration

What needs improvement?

Even though the log system is reliable, the tool must have a database. It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository. It could even improve performance and the ability for generating cross-domain reporting for better governance.

What other advice do I have?

It has a wide variety of preconfigured monitors, and great capability for monitoring whatever you wish, including configuring formulas for monitoring.

It is an agentless tool, and very easy to implement. For better performance, try to use another disk different than the OS.

Configure HP SiteScope Restart option for releasing HW resources.

Use of Regular Expressions (regex) is a valuable feature

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
IT Administrator with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
It has a lot of common API's out of the box, and this saves coding and maintaining these interfaces.
Pros and Cons
  • "It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
  • "Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."

Improvements to My Organization

SiteScope is deployed on our network perimeter, and gives our operations teams an end user perspective of service availability. In the past, we'd get caught up in the old silo arguments. - the server looks fine, must be the network - the network looks fine, must be the applications etc. now with SiteScope, we can show the ops teams that there is a problem from the client perspective, and SiteScope can help determine root cause.

Valuable Features

We use this product for monitoring client user experience. It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration. (NOTE: there is some missing functionality in API's). SiteScope has a lot of common API's out of the box, and this saves coding and maintaining these interfaces.

Room for Improvement

Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI.

Version 11.2X: Within the SiS GUI, you can individually add remote servers, and then configure multiple monitors to use this remote server. Via the API, this is not possible. You must use a template to create both the remote server and monitor. If you need to configure another monitor to use the same remote server, it became problematic. The API also has no ability to configure the stored credentials, and so on and so on. Basically, full automation of the SiS config is not possible, even using HP tools like HP Operations Orchestration, as the application, as I said, does not allow full configuration of monitor components via the API.

There are now subsequent versions released, and I have looked at the API updates included in these.

Stability Issues

We have some ongoing stability issues, specifically with SiteScope monitoring Windows servers via SSH, connecting to OpenSSH. There appears to be a compatibility issue with the SSH client deployed with SiteScope, that causes SiteScope to leave a stable connection open, and eventually SiteScope runs out of resources.

Customer Service and Technical Support

I only deal with HP support, so cannot compare to other vendors. I will say, over the past 12 - 18 months, I'm assuming due to HP's multiple splits and cost cutting, and their attempts to be a somewhat agile software provider, the overall quality of code and documentation has fallen.

Initial Setup

The initial deployment was easy and quick. Ongoing management and hardening can present some challenges, but no show stoppers.

If you read the manual it is quite straightforward and enables you to get a quick ROI. Full hardening and automation can present some challenges, but none insurmountable.

Pricing, Setup Cost and Licensing

Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model. Points are consumed simply by number of monitors deployed, so if you are wanting to do end user or application monitoring, you want this one. Endpoint licensing is best suited if you don't have a monitoring solution, and want SiteScope to be your agentless monitor. This way, you can deploy any number of monitors at the one server (e.g. CPU, memory, disc, event log) and if they all share the one remote connections, that's one license. As opposed to the point license, where each check (CPU, memory, disc) is a point.

Other Solutions Considered

As far as agentless monitoring goes, we did paper based reviews of other products, but never PoCs. SiteScope was chosen as we required a supported solution, and obtained entitlements and discounts due to our relationship with HP.

Other Advice

Most answer are found in the manual except for licensing, which you'll need to contact HP for. There is also the SiteScope Community edition I believe, which allows you to use the product for free to test it, but, from memory, limits you to 100 monitors I think.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
it_user486648 - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Engineer Manager at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
It's lightweight, and able to address gaps in our other monitoring tools.
Pros and Cons
  • "It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
  • "More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."

How has it helped my organization?

Quicker time to meet the requirements of our customer. Because it's agentless as opposed to install and manage agents, we're just focused on what monitors we need and getting those deployed.

What is most valuable?

It's lightweight, and its ability to address numerous gaps in our other monitoring tools. It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box. Unlike other tools, you can write a script, run it, and integrate it. It's another monitoring tool and also gives the customers, on demand, the ability to pull or have the monitors go out and interrogate the system and validate the health of the system on demand.

What needs improvement?

More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities. Currently there's one for Amazon. There's numerous other platforms like, MS Office 365, Exchange or IBM. I haven't seen one for HPE. Those capabilities are solutions to where they're just ready to go.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have had no issues with the stability.

How are customer service and technical support?

I have not personally used it so I can't speak to it. My own experiences with most of them is that they're OK. They're probably above or below average.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We went away from SiteScope many years ago and came back because of its simplicity. In the interim we switched to some of the IBM product lines. SiteScope is very intuitive and we've been able to accomplish what we want very quickly and efficiently compared to IBM.

How was the initial setup?

From my perspective right now, it seems fairly simple or straightforward. Most of it we had up and running in a couple hours. We spent more time trying to fulfill our own requirements. The only gap or complexity we've added is around provisioning of monitors because we're driving it from an automated service catalog.

What other advice do I have?

Don't over think it, it's a simple tool.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
William Linn - PeerSpot reviewer
Enterprise System Management at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Consultant
Top 10
It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc.
Pros and Cons
  • "It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."

    Improvements to My Organization

    It has been used in a wide area of monitoring systems and network devices in my company.

    Valuable Features

    It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc. It does not use an agent, which might tax system resources.

    Room for Improvement

    Licensing is a little steep. 

    SiS, the abbreviated acronym for the tool, used to be owned by another company. You could purchase the product with unlimited monitors for $2500. Since HP's acquisition of the product, licensing is done on a points-per-monitor basis. Each individual monitor costs x number of points, an HP sales rep has those exact numbers, which change, seemingly., at whim! :-) You just get an error that you cannot add more monitors without additional licensing! With OOTB you get a few, not enough though to monitor any numbers in a enterprise. And, with literally hundreds of nodes and application monitors, database, web, etc. available, costs can get steep!

    Stability Issues

    We haven't had any issues with stability.

    Scalability Issues

    We haven't had any issues with scalability.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Ravi Suvvari - PeerSpot reviewer
    Ravi SuvvariPerformance and Fault-tolerance Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Top 5LeaderboardReal User

    Well explained William

    it_user364155 - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior IT Infrastructure Specialist at Nordea
    Vendor
    When we perform testing, it gives us a single client for selecting which monitoring data we want for later analysis of the performance of our systems.
    Pros and Cons
    • "It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
    • "We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."

    Improvements to My Organization

    It's a monitoring tool that's deeply integrated with Performance Center. We can put a load on it and see all the information we need. Plus, it's an inexpensive solution.

    Valuable Features

    It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics. When we perform testing, it gives us a single client for selecting which monitoring data we want for later analysis of the performance of our systems.

    Room for Improvement

    We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope. I think this would make it a true monitoring tool for the environment.

    Stability Issues

    It just works.

    Scalability Issues

    We're able to scale when necessary.

    Customer Service and Technical Support

    We have not used tech support.

    Other Advice

    We'll probably remove SiteScope shortly because we've been using another monitoring tool in production. SiteScope is just not something we use very much of any more.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    Ravi Suvvari - PeerSpot reviewer
    Performance and Fault-tolerance Architect with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    It provides monitoring of system health and sends email alerts after reaching threshold limits.

    What is most valuable?

    • Agentless monitoring
    • Different types of health checks
    • Web-based UI for easy interaction
    • End-to-end monitoring
    • E-mail alert messages along with SMS features

    How has it helped my organization?

    System health check monitoring and email alerts after reaching threshold limits.

    What needs improvement?

    Monitor mobile health status too.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    6 years

    What was my experience with deployment of the solution?

    No

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    No

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    No

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Customer Service:

    7/10

    Technical Support:

    8/10

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    No

    What about the implementation team?

    HP vendor

    What was our ROI?

    100%

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Little expensive

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Splunk and Gomez

    What other advice do I have?

    No

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    it_user43743 - PeerSpot reviewer
    Director Technical Service - Monitoring Engineering at a recruiting/HR firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    It allows us to run queries to deal with different cases, so that we don’t have to go back to HP to open an ER for us.

    What is most valuable?

    The most valuable feature is its ability to do what it’s supposed to do, which is to ensure that you have a wide array of tool-sets to properly monitor your infrastructure. Also, that it’s able to scale properly is valuable.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The products have been able to deliver the service to our business, which is to ensure that the applications that depend on our servers are always available. The business and support teams can be supported properly. We can choose how to use HP’s tools to monitor the changing dynamics of IT technology. Sitescope allows us to run queries to deal with different cases, so that we don’t have to go back to HP to open an ER for us. That’s one of the main things I love about the product.

    What needs improvement?

    I think, what comes to mind, to be able to reliably do more monitoring on a single Sitescope server in a more compact way, with fewer servers, would be an area for improvement. Right now there’s no way to really say that you’ve hit the limit for the server, but that’s important to know.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Every product has its issues, but I think overall it’s stable. It’s never perfect but it’s pretty good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    I think that the scalability needs to be worked on a bit. We can scale fine horizontally, but we’d like to scale less horizontal and be more compact. HP still has a bit of ways to go to ensure that this happens. I would give it a 6-7/10.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    It depends. When you purchase the product, you have somebody managing your account that always handles your case, which ensures that you get the response from the right tier of service, which we’ve found extremely helpful.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    About nine years ago, they were changing requirements in what we were doing, so we needed to find a solution that could cover as much that we needed.

    How was the initial setup?

    Straightforward and very good.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We also looked at BMC, and IBM. We chose HP because of the pure requirements and matching functionality with the product. I think the key reason why we chose HP is that the solution gives you a tool-set to monitor the technology vs. other products that only gives you a very specific solution that you can only use to monitor one particular technology.

    What other advice do I have?

    You need to ensure that functionality meets the majority of your requirements. Quality or proposed quality of their support as well as their ability to keep ahead of the curve in terms of the technology. But remember there’s no perfect solution – you always apply the 80/20 rule and find the solution that can match your current requirements and anticipate what your future needs are. That’s why we’ve had our product for over nine years now, which shows we did a good job with our selection.

    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    PeerSpot user
    PeerSpot user
    Consultant at a comms service provider with 51-200 employees
    Vendor
    Easy to use solution but complicated when it comes to details

    Valuable Features:

    Agentless data collection Supporting a big number of monitor metrics

    Room for Improvement:

    May require a dashboard for the data collected

    Deployment Issues:

    Easy to deploy

    Initial Setup:

    Initial setup was straightforward but when it comes to monitors that look deep inside details like an agent data collection solution, too many customizations and scripting is needed.

    Other Solutions Considered:

    HP OM

    Other Advice:

    This solution is a data collection solution. Its added value can't be shown unless you have a clean and clear dashboard to review data collected and correlated
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: My company is an HP partner
    PeerSpot user
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Micro Focus SiteScope Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
    Updated: September 2022
    Buyer's Guide
    Download our free Micro Focus SiteScope Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.