We performed a comparison between Grafana and OpenText SiteScope 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 integration between Loki and Tempo is valuable."
"Great capacity planning and the solution has a great GUI."
"Kubernetes could help us to better visualize the trend of our data by recording and displaying our history over a chosen duration, such as the last 30 days."
"It has good stability."
"The comparison feature is very good."
"The initial setup is straightforward with just a few clicks on the solution's cloud."
"Grafana's built-in integration with third-party tools, databases, and MQs is an amazing feature."
"The solution has good features."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"For the system environment, SiteScope can be useful."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"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."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The look and feel of the charting and graph capabilities in Grafana could improve. If they provided a storyboard type of feature as they have in other solutions, such as PowerBI. The multi-tenanted and stitch metrics features could improve."
"It is limited on the reporting type supported, which is important for managerial-level officers who want reports that are either general or specific."
"We need different kinds of applications in our infrastructure to see information in Grafana."
"The formatting could be better."
"The solution has room for improvement with a better API to help automate the construction of the dashboards easier."
"I find issues with Grafana. For example, I am unable to open some services there. Then, we have to open ten different tabs to get it fixed. And it's annoying when there's something going on; we want to check Grafana, and it throws four different errors."
"Grafana need to improve the logging functionality."
"The documentation or training provided by Grafana is limited compared to its competitors, like Splunk."
"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."
"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
Grafana is ranked 6th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 39 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. Grafana is rated 8.0, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Grafana writes "Agent-free with great dashboards and an active community". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText SiteScope writes "Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited". Grafana is most compared with New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry, Dynatrace and Elastic Observability, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Elastic Observability. See our Grafana vs. OpenText SiteScope 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.