Splunk AppDynamics Reviews

We're a bank. We do use the predictive tools for the different products of the bank and the application which the bank utilizes.

AppD improves the productivity of Application Engineers, development teams, and other integrated items. Slowness or leak issue is a nut for the team now. Also, the team resolves or understands the network and query path every easy and resolves efficiently.

Our application uptime, increased by 10%, and overall productivity up by 30%.

Ticket or issue down by 12% over five years of use and experience.

Open to be applied and test any area and suite.

The tracing is the most important aspect of the solution. The way it traces the information within the particular application or within the particular infrastructure is great. That actually helps. Apart from that, all of the data that's in the production APM is good.  

Technical support is helpful.

The solution scales well.

The stability is good. 

We do have a combination of areas that need improvement. We do have the integration, such as end-user integration and experience that could be better. It is not just from the response point of view; it is more from the error and error detection point of view. This is due to the fact that these are all the banking applications as used by the banking staff, not by the end-user directly. Based on the banking staff feedback, based on the staff security or maybe dealing with the capital market, there needs to be some improvement.

They do provide the input growth on a daily basis in terms of what is coming in and how we receive the applications and how many we have. We've now started looking for a particular product that can make sure that it should connect with files and statements inside the product. 

The IO ratio, which we are looking for in terms of a report, is one of the concerns. We do monitor those details from AppDynamics, however, reporting and monitoring could be better.

There needs to be more analytics. That is what we are missing from the tool point of view. We need more information geared more towards helping us in making better decisions. When you do the coding that's for a banking situation or maybe in the incidents or capital market, it becomes very important that how much time I'm investing inside the transaction. A transaction which needs to be carried out for either confirming the payments or maybe either releasing the payments - these kinds of things. What I have seen with the use, as of now, is a bit of a lag when we are running on the global cloud or the public clouds, like Azure or the Google platform. 

Right now, we are fighting between three different stakeholders. With the networks, we have a different chat, with the vendors we have a different chat, and with the application team, we have a different chat. This approach doesn't provide a holistic view. Everyone has their own excuses and everyone has their own reasoning and conditions. 

If it can be able to intelligently provide all the things we need to look at, from a data point of view, that would be very useful.

I would say that I have between seven and eight years of experience, hands-on. However, later on in the time frame, over the last four or five years, I have not has as much hands-on experience with the tool. I'm more involved in various solution discussions and strategy building with the platform on top of the tool.

I would say it's very steady and for now, it's very reliable as well. It's stable. We don't have issues with bugs or crashes. 

The solution is very scalable so far in any testing scenario. It performs very well and gives us the expected output which we are looking to improve. 

We are using the solution for more than 600 small and big applications. We have around 78,000 people, including the back-end staff and the development team, that use the solution.

Overall, technical support has been very good. We're very satisfied with their level of support. So far, it's been very good for the bank.

Positive

We have used HPE BSM (now called MF APM). 

Due to these factors, we switch:

1. Costly

2. Implementation complexity

3. Multiple products and Integration

4. Not end-user friendly. 

I was not involved in the initial implementation. Nowadays, the way we approach the teams, sometimes it's very easy when it's an application with a known language like Python or maybe with Ruby or a kind of Java application. In terms of gateways inside the product, sometimes it is very tough, and sometimes it is very easy to get deployed. We're not using any out-of-the-box security. 

We have used model Train for the trainers and enforced all employees with operational training.

We achieve a great number, in terms of applications user availability increase by 30%. In treading, and agents, needs a smooth performance before the market starts. AppD provide a depth to measure any performances challenges, leak issue or even a chain linked issue story.

The pricing is a mixed bag. In some areas they are reasonably priced, however, in others, it's a bit expensive. 

We look for ease of implementation, diagnostics information shared, and controls to the team for working.

We're just an end-user of the product.

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

The deployment model depends on the solution or the size of the product which we are using, as the banks do have private and public clouds. In public clouds, we don't have much of the production instances. It's mainly the development. The free cloud and the cloud environment are completely on a private or in-house, on-premises solution with different ecosystems.

If a proper study has been done, and the solution makes sense for the company, I would recommend the solution. 

I would like to rate the solution at a seven out of ten. That consideration is mainly due to the fact that it covers a large portfolio of the product. It does have support for many other ERP tools. A lot of open customization is available and the product support team can help to customize the product. I've found this tool very useful and helpful on that.

I use AppDynamics when there's a performance issue with an application, but if it's a network-related performance issue, I use Accedian Skylight.

What I like best about AppDynamics is that it's functional, particularly in APM in Java and .NET.

What needs improvement in AppDynamics is installation. The installation process needs to be more straightforward. Deploying the product is also tricky, so this is an area for improvement.

Pricing is another area for improvement in AppDynamics because its current pricing model is no longer suited to containers and technologies.

The product used to be the best in the market ten years ago, but it now needs to regain its position as the leading product in its niche.

I've been using AppDynamics for ten years. I started my job ten years ago and remained in this area.

In terms of stability, AppDynamics is a four out of ten.

Scalability is the product's performance when you scale, and because the company is a SaaS company, it's not a very big deal. However, AppDynamics uses a MySQL database behind the engine, which is not the best for keeping metrics.

The solution could be more scalable and dynamic in terms of installation and configuration. Scalability-wise, AppDynamics is a four out of ten.

The support for AppDynamics used to be very good, and now it could be better. The support team could be more knowledgeable.

The technical support for AppDynamics is a four out of ten for me.

Neutral

I'm using AppDynamics, Datadog, and Dynatrace simultaneously.

Setting up and configuring AppDynamics is challenging because you need to give specific names to every container and server you deploy. Each name has to be unique, so it isn't easy to think of names in terms of dynamic environments. This means that when you move to microservices, AppDynamics has a very complex setup.

I'd rate the setup for the product as two out of ten.

The pricing model for AppDynamics isn't good. You have to subscribe to a yearly or a three-year licensing, which isn't very handy.

You buy a license for five hundred containers for a very large application, and you only need the containers for a limited time in that domain. For example, you only need five hundred containers once in that specific year, but you must buy five hundred licenses.

The current AppDynamics pricing model isn't fair. It's one out of ten pricing-wise. The solution is one of the most expensive in the market today.

I've switched to solutions such as Dynatrace, Datadog, and AppDynamics.

My rating for AppDynamics is four out of ten because it has a lot of room for improvement.

We're using AppDynamics Server Monitoring for the IT infrastructure and server of the customers.

What I like most about AppDynamics Server Monitoring is that it's easy to manipulate and easy to implement. All solutions have the same features, but what sets AppDynamics Server Monitoring apart is that it's really quick to implement.

AppDynamics Server Monitoring has a great interface. As a developer, it doesn't matter whether it's SolarWinds, Dynatrace, or any APM you're using, but it would matter to the customer. A product must be easy to manipulate or use, for example, AppDynamics Server Monitoring, for the customer, but for developers like my team, there's no pressure, even if a solution requires coding.

AppDynamics Server Monitoring has room for improvement in terms of pricing. If the price could be cheaper, it would be great for both the customer and the integrator.

What I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Server Monitoring is a better dashboard for the customer. The dashboard should be more interactive.

I've been using AppDynamics Server Monitoring for three years now.

AppDynamics Server Monitoring is a stable solution. Its stability is good.

AppDynamics Server Monitoring can be scaled up and down according to your needs, so it's a scalable solution.

I find the technical support for AppDynamics Server Monitoring interactive and quick. You can get support WebEx sessions, and if I would rate support from one to five, I'd give a five.

My company works with a lot of solutions as it's an integration provider. For example, I work with AppDynamics Server Monitoring, and a colleague works with SolarWinds. Another colleague works with Kubernetes. The team works with different monitoring solutions, including Nagios.

Setting up AppDynamics Server Monitoring is easy. It's not hard to implement. It's straightforward and quick, and even the architecture isn't that complex. The solution is easy to implement.

I'm rating the setup for AppDynamics Server Monitoring five out of five because it's very easy. Sometimes, you might find some difficulty, but the support team can help resolve that quickly.

The pricing for AppDynamics Server Monitoring in Africa and the Middle East is too expensive, so it's very hard to sell it to customers. If there could be different pricing or package for the region, that would be great.

My company pays for the license of AppDynamics Server Monitoring on a per-agent, per-server basis. It's $700 to $1000 per server, and it's paid annually. My company is on a subscription model for the solution.

On a scale of one to five, where one is expensive and five is cheap, my rating for the price of AppDynamics Server Monitoring is a two.

I'm using the monitoring solution AppDynamics Server Monitoring.

My rating for AppDynamics Server Monitoring is nine out of ten.

My company is a reseller/integrator of AppDynamics Server Monitoring.

I work with a global bank that operates across Asia, the United States, and Europe. It's a few thousand people. We primarily use AppDynamics for Kubernetes, web applications, middleware APIs, Java, etc. In terms of technology, it's either Java Spring Boot or some of the API calls, and some of the use cases include continuously checking API availability. 

Some use cases are related to front-end tuning or the user experience across the globe. The applications are used across America, Europe, and some parts of Asia. It's a global system, and user experience is what we wanted to measure. AppDynamics is SaaS. I've never used an on-prem version. The controllers are mostly on AWS, while the agents are deployed on-premises.

Transition tracing is the most valuable is pretty easy and useful, but the user experience piece is also good. 

The Kubernetes cluster agent has not yet matured. That's one area that requires a lot of improvement. You have two options for implementing the Kubernetes agent. One is deployed in DocCloud, but you can't download those images from DocCloud for security reasons at most organizations, so this option isn't that useful.

The installation for the second option isn't that user-friendly. Transition tracing for the Kubernetes application is challenging. You have to navigate to a new set of user interfaces in AppDynamics, so that's the pain point. There is an icon you need to click on to get a newer user interface.

I've been using AppDynamics for almost five years. 

AppDynamics scaled well up to around 3,000 agents. The performance deteriorated after that, while Dynatrace could support more than 10,000 agents. We were surprised that AppDynamics' scalability is not so good.

I had a good experience with tech support. When we raised a ticket with AppDynamics, we usually got a response within a few hours. If we set up a call, their engineers will get on the phone with us. That was also reasonably good. 

Setting up AppDynamics is relatively straightforward except for the Kubernetes part. It was all easy for the Kubernetes cluster agent part. We implemented thousands of agents using Ansible, so it was automated. It was about 15 to 20 minutes in terms of pipeline and restarting because a lot of the scripting and automation were already done. 

The AppDynamics license is divided. It isn't one all-inclusive license. Dynatrace has one agent, but AppDynamics has different sets of licenses. You need to define your use case and what you want to monitor. That is something you need to be clear about. Once you know your use case clearly, take time to figure out your target state metric, and go for AppDynamics. 

I rate AppDynamics seven out of 10. In the modern world, Dynatrace is moving toward helping the companies in the current landscape, but AppDynamics is a second-generation company. It needs to adopt more of a lifecycle perspective rather than limiting itself to triage, tracing, etc.

I am not a user, I am an implementer.

For EUC, one of the use cases would be to monitor online shopping from retail, for example, to understand the client's journey and if they are experiencing any difficulties in, at the very least, making their purchase or browsing, the front-end of a specific customer's online shopping.

The second would be internal applications to determine whether the application is living in an order that allows it to process its workloads. It's quite generic because we have so many different types of applications.

With Real-User Monitoring, the most valuable features are what I have described. We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems. It gives us full visibility end-to-end, and if there are any issues, we can observe and record them to improve application performance quality. In addition to the EUC, you can add synthetic transactions, where you can see from every point if your application is performing adequately in terms of reachability if you are running a global site.

As AppDynamics partners, we are fully aware of the roadmap, but I would like them to enhance their SAP monitoring.

One of the features that I would like to see is centralized agent management in the platform console.

While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support.

I've been working with AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring for six years. Since the existence of AppDynamics.

It is deployed both on the cloud and on-premises.

We don't have a specific version, we have several instances. I work for an MSP, and we offer these services to a large number of customers.

We have clients using the latest versions, as well as clients using older versions.

AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is stable if it's quick. Depending on where the application is hosted, for example, the same time it takes someone in Singapore to access an application is unlikely to be the same time it takes someone in the UK to access it.

Scalability is also important. That is not directly related to end-user monitoring, but it will be one of the business cases involving the use of microservices and the dynamic expansion of a solution.

In terms of technical support, they don't need to be faster, but they could be more usable. I believe they can contribute more than robots because they do not always adhere to the same standards. They can be a little more helpful, and I'm speaking broadly because they have good guys in there, but we don't always get the good guys, the good resources. To be honest, I can't say I have any complaints.

I am familiar with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, New Relic, and Datadog, which are the four main ones that we currently use.

When it comes to AppDynamics, we use all of it, all the stack.

The setup is straightforward. I don't see an issue if it's on-premises, but if it's SaaS, we don't install anything other than the agent.

AppDynamics does not usually do monthly payments. They do it on an annual basis, at the very least.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using this solution.

I would rate AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a seven out of ten.

We use AppDynamics mainly to monitor the application performance.

The most valuable feature of AppDynamics is its ability to track the transactions between different applications.

AppDynamics should improve its ability to track all the transactions.

We have been using AppDynamics for approximately three years.

AppDynamics is a stable product. We rarely had any issues with the solution.

I rate AppDynamics ten out of ten for scalability.

Getting a response from the solution's technical support team is harder and takes longer. Since the solution has a structural support model, it requires some layers of escalation to get the correct response.

Neutral

The solution's initial setup is easy. However, it is harder than Checkmk because it needs to install the agent.

The solution's initial deployment takes about three to four months. However, it's a work in progress because new applications are added every time.

AppDynamics is an expensive solution.

AppDynamics is deployed on-cloud in our organization.

Overall, I rate AppDynamics a nine out of ten.

System monitoring and real user monitoring were the two domains in which the product was used in my company.

AppDynamics Mobile Real-User Monitoring was a tool directly used by my company's client. I have no answer if you ask me why my company's client decided to use the tool. My company's client used the tool to monitor servers in their entire business process, including some servers, databases, clusters, mobile users, and for different services.

The most valuable feature of the solution is its GUI. With the product's GUI, one doesn't have to check for details since one can see the entire business flow in one go. At a glance, you can understand where your business flow breaks since the tool's entire GUI is pretty good. Apart from that, the auto-remediation in the tool helps if the CPU or server is getting exhausted by indicating the files that should be deleted. Auto-remediation and GUI are two good features of the product.

Though I haven't explored AppDynamics Mobile Real-User Monitoring a lot, considering the way the setup of the product, I did not understand certain concepts. The way the agentless monitoring and agent monitoring get used is to be decided by the user, but there is no clarification on the setup phase or on how and why to use the aforementioned options. When it comes to complex environments, the best thing you would like is that the setup should be fairly easy. The product's setup phase is a bit tricky and needs improvement, especially depending on the server environment since the product has a specific file format and a specific configuration form.

I have been using AppDynamics Mobile Real-User Monitoring for six months. I am just an end-user of the solution.

It is a stable solution.

Adding users directly to the solution was okay, and I did not face any issues with it.

For one of my projects, less than 150 employees in the company were using AppDynamics Mobile Real-User Monitoring.

The solution's technical support was good. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten. I assume the solution's technical support was expensive. In my company, we were recommended not to reach out to support teams in a very quick or frequent manner.

Positive

The product's setup phase is a bit tricky.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

I believe there was probably an extra charge whenever I wanted to contact the support team.

I would say that if you have a good budget and want a good and interactive tool where you don't have to do a lot of integrations, then you can go ahead with AppDynamics Mobile Real-User Monitoring. If you are tight on budget, considering before buying it is important since the number of users who can use it depends on the licenses. It takes quite a lot to exchange the license and all regarding the tool.

I like the product's GUI since you don't have to put in much effort to see where exactly my process is broken, and you can easily see how many users are using it in real time. The product allows you to check the way it works. Providing alerts to users is really fast in the product, and you have multiple options to receive alerts, like email, mobile messages, or automated voice calls. I can't give the product a ten out of ten rating because if you are stuck somewhere, then getting support to assist you with configuration or with other situations can be a little tricky.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use AppDynamics Database Monitoring to identify high spikes in critical data, which helps us better understand when applications stop responding or are not responding well.

The solution can be deployed on-premises or in the cloud.

Data monitoring is the most valuable feature.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I would like the solution to be more customizable to meet our client's requirements.

I have been using AppDynamics Database Monitoring for two years.

I give the stability of AppDynamics Database Monitoring an eight out of ten.

I give the scalability of AppDynamics Database Monitoring a nine out of ten.

The technical support is excellent.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment takes two weeks and requires one architect and one developer.

We implement the solution for our clients.

The pricing is average. I give the price a five out of ten.

The license is paid on an annual basis.

I give AppDynamics Database Monitoring a ten out of ten.

We require five people to maintain the solution.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring only requires users to have a basic understanding of databases.