We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: VMware Tanzu Observability by Wavefront is favored over Azure Monitor because of its ease of deployment, integration with multiple solutions, support for container platforms like Kubernetes, and real-time visibility into complex cloud-native environments. Azure Monitor is praised for its application insights and telemetry, and low-cost pricing, but needs improvement in visualization, integration with third-party services, and out-of-the-box functionalities.
"The solution works well overall. It's easy to implement and simple to use."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"Provides an overview and high-level information."
"Good load and metrics gathering and very good analysis."
"The solution's most valuable features are its ability to focus on delivery and maximizing the performance of applications and services."
"Among the valuable features of this solution, Application Insights stands out as one of the most significant. It provides insights into application performance and helps identify issues and bottlenecks."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"The upside to the solution is if you are working in a Microsoft or Azure environment, it makes things easier."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"People are very pleased with the implementation."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"No issues with stability."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"There are a lot of things that take more time to do, such as charting, alerting, and correlation of data, and things like that. Azure Monitor doesn't tell you why something happened. It just tells you that it happened. It should also have some type of AI. Environments and applications are becoming more and more complex every day with hundreds or thousands of microservices. Therefore, having to do a lot of the stuff manually takes a lot of time, and on top of that, troubleshooting issues takes a lot of time. The traditional method of troubleshooting doesn't really work for or apply to this environment we're in. So, having an AI-based system and the ability to automate deployments of your monitoring and configurations makes it much easier."
"The solution needs better monitoring. It requires better log controls."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"They need to work with other cloud providers - not just Azure."
"It might not have all of the capabilities we will need."
"The monitoring of Kubernetes clusters needs improvement to be on par with competitors."
"They need to work on a more hybrid deployment that will allow us to monitor local on-premise deployments and connect to different systems. I would like to see more integration."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Monitor is ranked 5th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 46 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 29th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.8, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and Grafana, whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Grafana, Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog and AppDynamics. See our Azure Monitor vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications report.
See our list of best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors and best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Cloud Monitoring Software 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.