We performed a comparison between Datadog and OpenText Real User Monitoring based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has helped out organization gain improved visibility."
"The solution is useful for monitoring logs."
"I don't have to worry about upgrades with the AWS version."
"Datadog's log aggregation is really helpful since it lets me and every other engineer on my team login, view, and share logs when we need to debug our application."
"It has enhanced the performance of my team."
"Datadog has helped us a ton by allowing us to set up a multitude of easily configurable alarms across our tech stack and infrastructure."
"We like the distributed tracing and flame graphs for debugging. This has been invaluable for us during periods of high traffic or red alert conditions."
"We've been able to glean from the monitors what servers are down, and can alert the team in Slack."
"The technical support is good at resolving issues."
"Real User Monitor has improved our productivity."
"The most useful feature of this solution is tracking. When the application's traffic has been monitored it is taken from that particular application and analyzed. It is then given a live session of that particular user. For example, if you are using your bank application to do some kind of transaction, everything that you do can be tracked by that application."
"The reporting feature is good for us."
"The most valuable feature is application performance monitoring."
"The Real User Monitor, with its transaction and synthetic transaction monitoring, is the typical classic in APM cases when the customer would like to do transaction monitoring. Micro Focus scores better where the underlying infrastructure management is also covered by Micro Focus tools."
"Very easy to implement."
"We need a lot of modules since we collect all data logs from all operating systems."
"It seems that admin cost control granularity is an afterthought."
"I often have issues with the UI in my browser."
"I would love to see support for front-end and mobile applications. Right now, it is mostly all back-end stuff. Being able to do some integration with our front-end products would be awesome."
"There are things about it that we would like to be fixed, such as it is taking averages of average. This results in data that we don't expect."
"I'm still exploring the trial version, and it is fine. One thing that I haven't been able to figure out is how to retrieve a report. This is something that could be improved. I probably need to navigate to a place to access the reports."
"The way data is represented can be limiting. When I first tried it out a long time ago, you could graph a metric and another metric, and they'd overlay, but you couldn't take the ratio between the two."
"I think better access to their engineers when we have a problem could be better."
"This technology is considered to be older."
"One area to improve is the user interface, of course. The second one is their R&D has virtually stopped building a product roadmap."
"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."
"Some issues with login errors."
"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."
"We would like to see support for non-Windows environments."
"When we want to monitor our encrypted traffic, this product doesn't work because our cipher is not supported."
More OpenText Real User Monitoring Pricing and Cost Advice →
Datadog is ranked 1st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 137 reviews while OpenText Real User Monitoring is ranked 46th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 8 reviews. Datadog is rated 8.6, while OpenText Real User Monitoring is rated 6.2. The top reviewer of Datadog writes "Very good RUM, synthetics, and infrastructure host maps". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Real User Monitoring writes "The reports and metrics we collect help us to improve our services". Datadog is most compared with Dynatrace, Azure Monitor, New Relic, AWS X-Ray and Elastic Observability, whereas OpenText Real User Monitoring is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Honeycomb.io and VMware Aria Operations for Applications. See our Datadog vs. OpenText Real User Monitoring report.
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.