We performed a comparison between DX SaaS 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."It supports numerous platforms."
"Actionable insight is the most valuable feature."
"DX allows you to customize and gives you a high degree of control."
"Being able to create your monitors for monitoring your internal URLs and databases and other things like that is valuable."
"VM monitoring is pretty good showing good visualizations of how VMs are operating within the context of all the VMs running on the same hypervisor."
"It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics."
"Infrastructure monitoring is the most valuable feature."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
"The tool has capabilities other than managing web-based applications, like URL Monitor and EPI Script. It is also easy to use the tool."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"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."
"The ability to scale presents a challenge as the cost of handling vast amounts of data in the cloud must be taken into account."
"DX SaaS is a latecomer to the APM market. Some things that are straightforward in Dynatrace are complicated in DX. For example, upgrading the agents is a seamless process in Dynatrace, but it's a pain in DX SaaS. You should be able to upgrade in the Application Command Center. However, it is not working correctly."
"Old user interface and dashboards could be improved."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"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."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope."
"They need to offer better technical support, which, right now, is not helpful or responsive."
"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."
"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."
DX SaaS is ranked 49th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 3 reviews while OpenText SiteScope is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 24 reviews. DX SaaS is rated 6.6, while OpenText SiteScope is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of DX SaaS writes "It's highly customizable but lacks many features of available in competing solutions". 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". DX SaaS is most compared with DX Unified Infrastructure Management, Nagios XI, Zabbix and Dynatrace, whereas OpenText SiteScope is most compared with SCOM, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Splunk Enterprise Security. See our DX SaaS 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.