We performed a comparison between New Relic 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."They instrument up from the bottom to the top – every piece of code - they have a very perfect read of what’s being done, and how long it’s taking."
"It is stable and scalable."
"The most important thing is that it tells us where the latency in throughput and response time are."
"The product allows the developer to see the actual problems in the applications."
"The solution is good for sending alerts, drawing graphs about system usage, and creating plug-ins."
"The simplicity of the dashboard is very good."
"The most valuable features are the dashboards and tracing."
"The synthetics, alerts, and native inbuilt capabilities for monitoring the cloud with the New Relic agents have been helpful."
"SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability."
"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."
"It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc."
"Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"The solution is quite expensive."
"The solution does not provide input on how the page performs in a big group. It just says that the page performance is bad, but it does not say what can be done to improve it. If they could provide some insight or guidance on how to make improvements, that would be a big help."
"New Relic APM can improve the information when we dig deeper to check a problem. There should be more detailed information provided."
"There were some settings we had issues with."
"They need to improve the alerting and dashboarding as these are the key features in DevOps."
"The UX/UI design of New Relic APM could be improved. The solution currently has some slow pages in terms of loading and viewing the pages, for example, the reports. The reports and other pages take a long time to load."
"They don't have an opportunity to share the dashboard with the public. If you want to share it with stakeholders or people outside the organization who just want to have a look at a couple of metrics, you can't do that without onboarding them to the product itself."
"Some of our customers see New Relic as a promising product to have, and we would like to deliver it to them. The only way we would be able to do that would be if we had server appliance for clients that we could install in their data centres."
"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."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"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."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"We have four or five data centers around North America where we have it deployed into a single or a two-server primary backup type of deployment. All those are made available under a single GUI provided by Micro Focus that allows you to put them all together. A room for improvement would be an appliance or a server that would manage all of our other servers so that I don't have to remember to log on to all different servers and data centers. I could manage them from a single location."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
New Relic is ranked 3rd in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 152 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 28th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. New Relic is rated 8.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of New Relic writes "Has a simple user interface and end-to-end monitoring and self-healing features". 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". New Relic is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, Elastic Observability, Grafana and Prometheus, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our New Relic 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.