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.
"Technical support is good and helpful...The initial setup is easy."
"For me, the best feature is the log analysis with Azure Monitor's Log Analytics. Without being able to analyze the logs of all the activities that affect the performance of a machine, your monitoring effectiveness will be severely limited."
"One of the most useful aspects of this solution is the out-of-the-box functionality on all areas, especially on Application Insights, zero instrumentation, and artificial intelligence for event correlation."
"The feature that I found most valuable in Azure Monitor is its monitoring abilities. With Azure Monitor, you are able to monitor all of your cloud resources across multiple subscriptions in one dashboard and create solution-specific alerts that can trigger an email to the team responsible for that specific solution."
"Log analytics and log queries are the most valuable features of Azure Monitor."
"It's a service from Microsoft, so it will scale."
"I am monitoring all of my Azure Monitor and getting good reports. I can customize the reports to get the information I need. I am also getting emails about which AAS instances are down and everything in the system related to my services. It is easy to use, scalable, and user-friendly. Microsoft has Many guides and videos to help you understand how to create and use Azure Monitor."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"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."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"No issues with stability."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"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."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"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."
"In my opinion, they should improve the overall user experience, especially when it comes to indexing and searching collective logs."
"The solution's monitoring feature has limitations for analyzing multiple metrics."
"The price could be lower but it is not a must."
"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."
"I would like more transparency when we use the solution with another environment, like on-premises, or on another cloud environment, like AWS or GCP."
"The default interface should be improved."
"The process of implementation needs to be easier."
"As a younger product it still has room for feature improvement and enhancement."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"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."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"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."
"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."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Monitor is ranked 5th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 45 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 28th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 9 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, 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.