Dynatrace Reviews

My main use case would be for a business transaction and doing a monitoring solution that my client is looking for.

We feel the Dynatrace Managed, the stage that this product is in right now, is not 100% mature. Its admin is the best compared to the managed. I understand it is under the transformation from AppMon to Dynatrace, but we are still waiting for the better dashboard views to come in to play for the executive views, the business transactions, etc.

I used to be a monitoring person for IBM, for close to 10 years. I moved to monitoring Dynatrace recently, and I see lot of benefit while monitoring the microservices related to this product.

The one thing we have tried the most is the microservice monitoring. All the apps are moving from the native server base to serverless. Some of them are AWS microservices, for example. This product seems best when compared to other vendors.

It still has a long way to go to reach that single pane of glass based on the releases that it launched into this training session. It looks like slowly features are coming out every month, and I am expecting more features to be released. However, I would just like to have a solution that cleary works with the current situation, i.e., how we can integrate the products to achieve better results for what we seek.

Also, it does not have mature enough dashboards.

I am fairly new to this product, but stability is good. 

They have quick answers for scalability. When we wanted to get up from two nodes to three nodes, it worked quite fine. We are happy with that.

When something goes wrong, support is unbelievable. I really can't expect that they are so slow in the support, which I really did not like. They expect the customer to do the basic analysis, do all the solutions, and find the solutions themselves. If it is really a product problem, only then will they be able to identify and spend time on the customer. 

Several issues in the last month took us the whole day to get our system back online. It is good that we are not 100% live with all our critical applications, so management is not so hard on the Dynatrace team. I can't imagine that will happen again, and I am wondering how do I improve the support? Long story short, the support is not good.

Siloed monitoring tools were for old style of application deployments. They were good for that aspect, but not anymore. 

CA Wiley and similar products are good for a JVM in-house infrastructure. Now that technology has changed in the last two years, so they are not the ideal solutions anymore.

We are partially enrolled, but I have not done it 100%. Next week, I am setting up a lab environment in my organization. Then, I will be doing it completely.

Coming up from the OneAgent side deployment, it is basically a daily job and a 100% improvement. It is a lot better improvement from the agent side. Earlier, it used to be every tiny agent for each aspect.

Being on the technologies team, I get to use all the products that the people see. We always pick the top three in the market to do the PoC. Dynatrace being reliable, backed up with the support, etc. So, we did a PoC with Dynatrace, New Relic, and AppDynamics. Then, we have chosen this one, which meets all the company standards and requirements.

Definitely implement the solution because I can see the Dynatrace team is working with all the customer requirements. I am hoping to have a better solution by the end of the year.

The importance of the role of AI when it comes to IT's ability to scale in their cloud and manage performance problems:

1. AI is not the 100% solution for all organizations.
2. It is the common quick solution for all the apps. 

If anybody is interested in doing more real analysis and baselining in AI, it really does not work out. I need my SLA for my set of transactions. I do not need somebody telling me and defining that this is your application solely. So, it is good and bad for the solution.

If I had just one solution which could provide real answers, not just data, I would need Dynatrace Managed to be my back-end and I would want AppMon to be the front-end. Basically, I am relying on both the products to fit my exact solution.

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: I am a supporting person, not the decision maker, but my review is definitely considered and valuable. I am the APM architect in my group with middleware background, which has knowledge on all the moving parts in web application technology, not just monitoring.

Support is the first criteria, because that is the lone factor after purchasing the product. Features, while I am not 100% happy with this, with all the technology and the innovation, Dynatrace has already met this target, but the support is missing. So, the vendor, in my view, as an active technician, needs better support. From a management standpoint, it is the other way around. Also, there is licensing and costs.

My primary use case is for monitoring our applications in production. We have a number of consumer-facing applications. 

It performs really well. I have been using it for a few years now, and every year we see a lot of benefit in the many features that come out in product development.

The main benefit right now is that we really know how production is behaving at any point in time and if we need to scale; we can be more proactive versus reactive, serving our customers. We have a number of different apps in other countries, so I think it gives us a holistic view, not just for one app, but for all of our apps.

It's all consumer-facing, so it has a direct revenue aspect to it. If things were to go down, we would lose actual revenue. So it's really not a nice-to-have, it's a must-have.

It's the dashboards. The dashboards provide very good visibility into it no matter what your role or title is. They provide very good visibility into what's happening in production. It's kind of a one-stop shop for all that information, instead of having to through logs, or through multiple systems to get that information.

I also think it's more than monitoring, that's what we are learning here at the Perform 2018 conference. It's more of a platform, and it's trying to enable a bunch of different functionalities, not just the monitoring aspect of it. I think the whole AI part of it is going to be pretty interesting. To me, another area that's personally of interest is native integration, so that we can make native apps today that look like they're getting better, in the long-term perspective.

I'd like to see native support, because we're launching native apps in multiple countries so we really want to have a really good feel for how those apps are going and how well they're performing, if there are issues. 

The other one is AWS. I think they've just announced something with them. We do have a lot of AWS Lambdas in production right now for a couple of apps we have, so I'm looking forward to that being available to use.

I can't really think of a limitation, I think that it has a lot of good features. Maybe some mobile, tablet-based dashboards, even though I do believe they're already supported, but a better native capability from that perspective, having those dashboards available from the native experience.

I think it's pretty stable. I haven't really heard of any outages or things that have gone wrong. I don't use it literally every day, day in and day out, but from what I've seen and experienced, I've not really had any problems.

I think it's pretty scalable, because of the way its designed and architected, it works pretty well.

They were pretty effective. We've had to open tickets a couple of times for their new features that we were trying to integrate with, or a problem with a current feature. Their helpful resource is the guardian, which is the best security program. There is a person dedicated to each client. I think that's a pretty good idea. Most of the companies I'm typically consulting with are Professional Services type set-ups, but I think the Guardian program is pretty awesome. It's really beneficial.

I wasn't too directly involved. I worked with the team that was doing the setup, but I think it was pretty straightforward. It was pretty quick, actually. Without doing much, just installing the agents, it gives you so much automatic capability. And then you can always tweak that and configure that and make it better. But, right out of the box, I think it's really easy to install.

When it comes to the nature of digital complexity, I personally think AI plays a pretty wide role when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and to manage performance of product. As we have more and more data in our systems, getting more complex, going into the cloud, we will need to rely on AI in certain aspects of the decision-making. There will still always be a human aspect, in my opinion. But AI will assist with a lot of trivial or not mission-critical type tasks.

I have used siloed solutions at other organizations. Honestly, I don't recall a lot of the details, but in general they did not have a great interface. The information wasn't easy to use when troubleshooting issues in production. They didn't have as many good integrations with other products and tools, so a combination those were the challenges with them.

If there was just one solution that could provide real analysis as opposed to just data, I think that would really tell us what we need to work on and help us prioritize, and not have an ocean of issues. We could focus on the ones our customers are more impacted by. It would be pretty good to take care of them. And the other part would be, it would help us get into consumer insight and help us build our product roadmap, accordingly. We could learn from the customer and then act on that learning.

When looking at vendors, one of the things we look for is the least amount of setup. That's the number one. You don't want to have to invest in a lot of configuration and coding to enable the product. The other thing is, what kind of user interface does it have and how good is the troubleshooting tool. A lot of monitoring will tell you there's a problem, but won't really tell you how to solve it. And third is innovation, because technology is changing so rapidly and a monitoring tool needs to be up-to-date. So it's important that we will continue to be able to monitor and do stuff that's coming out.

Definitely start with a program in mind and know how you measure success, and adoption of really any tool, whether a monitoring tool or not. That's really how you get buy-in from all the right stakeholders, you get the right training in place upfront, versus, setting it up and then struggling to plug in everybody, to get on it and show the value of it . So I would think having a program or a better plan upfront helps.

Our group handles a multitude of applications using Dynatrace. In my experience, I have used a lot of different tools, and Dynatrace has been pretty awesome with handling all the various issues that pop up.

PurePath is pretty awesome. The amount of data that the tool exposes compared to a lot of other agent-base suites is dramatically different. A plethora of people  embrace a lot of the topology views and various different things. I am primarily doing DC RUM, so on that side there are a lot of awesome abilities where people who can't implement an agent are able to still monitor a lot of their apps and decodes.

We are not using the ServiceNow integrations. We have to go through this event engine, so some of the data and the alerts get taken out. We have a script that pulls in some data around what the alert is dealing with, but maybe there is more data that could be exposed there. Besides that, in regards to Diffie-Hellman encryption stuff, it is a hurdle with what we are doing with DC RUM, where everyone is embracing stronger security suites, but the whole point of DC RUM is to get that data between the tiers.

We have big data solutions now coming in, so we are being asked to export some of that data into Tableau and various different platforms, so anything that makes that easier is welcome. DC RUM has an API that they can call, and Dynatrace can stream out to it. Those APIs are welcome.

There have been problems, but nothing that we could not figure out. There have been a couple issues where agents have caused issues with applications, but you could chalk that up to QA testing or other stuff. Overall, it has been a good product.

I hear it is supposed to be improving. My impression is mixed. We have a lot of Dynatrace servers with a lot of agents, so we are pushing the capacity of some of those servers. At the moment, we are not doing any cross-server stitching between the agents, so we are missing out on that piece a little bit. However, that will improve with the next version. Therefore, we are managing the capacity, but currently it is decentralized.

Technical support is awesome. I primarily do DC RUM, but all of that is in Poland, and they are phenomenal.

I have used CA, Wiley, CA CEM, and a little BMC stuff; those are the main ones.

They were good in their own silo. They just did not bring everything together in one central view. That was the difficulty. A lot of teams did not embrace it as much as we have seen the Dynatrace platform be embraced.

We switched from CA to Dynatrace, because limited data that was being exposed from Wiley. You get similar response time volume and error rate for instruments and components, but it is a lot more manual to get those components instrumented. Whereas a PurePath is right in front of you, so it is really easy to see what areas you want to alert on and catch.

Initial setup is straightforward. I have stood it up at multiple companies. I did it at Verizon Wireless, PNC, and Merck Pharmaceuticals. I knew what to do, so it was easy. 

When I first did an install, there were some hurdles. However, everything was well supported by our site rep, who came on site frequently in New Jersey, and was helping me out. It helped.

I was in for onboarding DC RUM. We did a PoC with BMC, CA, Dynatrace, and AppDynamics. There are some other competitors who are always being looked at, but the data exposed was dramatically better from Dynatrace, so that is why we went with Dynatrace.

Look at Dynatrace. Having worked with it and recommended it for approximately eight years, it has been a great platform.

The role of AI when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and manage performance problems is very important. We must embrace the AI overlord. There is a lot of data that comes into Dynatrace, and anything that makes it easier to arrive at the end resolution of a problem is welcome. There is always more analysis that needs to be done, but I think it is important to start using AI to get there more quickly.

If I had just one solution that could provide real answers, not just data, the immediate benefit I would like to see is anything that helps the app team know how to get the answer more quickly and save us time in the middle of the night. 

We get woken up all hours of the night for issues. You would hope that app teams would start to use the tools themselves, when it comes down to it, we know the tool best because we manage it. 

Most important criteria when selecting a vendor: 

The two main things I would say are critical:

1. Obviously, the technology cannot fall behind competitors, but at the same time, they have to remain pretty agile in developing the tool. 
2. They need a large enough support staff where any issues which arise, we get support on them. 

From an operational perspective, monitoring systems. We've primarily deployed it in production to give better awareness to application support teams of how their apps have been doing. We do have it deployed in pre-production as well, and are actively pursuing these cases in that space as well. It's just easier to sell to executives from the operations side first.

Mean time to resolution is probably the biggest improvement. Also, operational awareness is probably one I haven't touched on too much. I think in the past a lot of teams really didn't have a comfortable feel for how well, or not well, their applications were performing. You would get log files, things like that, just a small amount of perspective. In a lot of cases, people complaining was their first indicator of a problem and, really, nobody wants to be in that situation.

We started using this product about five years ago, and with AppMon. That was one of our first big wins, getting these big TV dashboards up all over the place. It really gave executives confidence that we did have things under control. At least we knew what was going on. It wasn't always the green check-mark up there, but we knew when there was a problem, before people called in and told us there was one. So that was a huge benefit.

• End-to-end visibility of the applications, since we have them instrumented. Understanding where the hotspots are in the applications. 
• Quick Fault Domain Isolations: When people are having a problem, understanding where to look, and letting all the other people go back to their day jobs. 
• The UEM feature, User Experience Management: Understanding how users are perceiving the application and then connecting that back into back-end systems to understand why things have gotten slow and then dealing with things.

Over the last year, one of the things we've had a challenge with is, we've used AppMon for so long, people are quite comfortable with it. We had a pilot of Dynatrace SaaS up and running for about a year, trying to transition application teams over to it: "Try this new tool out," - especially at microservices-based applications. And a lot of the features at the time that were in AppMon were not yet available, or worked differently, so we had some challenges in internally selling it. Since then, a lot of those features have been added into the new platform, and I'd say in some cases have leapfrogged over where AppMon is.

The one thing people really liked that we can do in AppMon is executive dashboards and, until recently, you couldn't even create the business transactions you need for the data at the back-end of those dashboards. But if I had to ask for one thing it would be: In the new platform, give me the ability to do dashboarding in the way it's done in AppMon, and I think that would bridge a lot of the missing pieces. If I could do the same type of executive dashboards on the walls, they would be happy.

As far as the new tool goes, we haven't had any issues with stability at all. I'm really impressed with the way they've architected it and made it much more scalable than the AppMon solution. 

We've had some challenges with AppMon in the past, mostly due to the top-end Dynatrace server not having an HA solution, which they're addressing now with the new version. So that's a big win for us as well. 

These things, when they first started out, were kind of neat and cool but they were never considered mission critical early on. Fast forward a few years to now, and nobody can afford the Dynatrace solution not being online. People are using it to support their apps. It is considered mission critical. So having HA built in, making this stuff rock solid, is very important to us.

So as far as AppMon, we knew where there were ceilings in the product. We've got a pretty big company and we hit some of those scalability limitations early on, to the point we were running about eight AppMon servers just for production load alone. One would never handle it. 

The thing that impressed me about the new Dynatrace Managed offering is that people are seeing, here at the Perfrom 2018 conference already, about 100,000 host limitation, at this point. But that's more than enough for us to handle our entire production infrastructure, so I'm looking forward to actually collapsing all of the AppMon stuff into one big solution where I can see, end-to-end, any app offering. Even if it crosses lines of business, you get full visibility. So I'm very impressed.

I wouldn't say we need to call them that often, the solution does not require a lot of hand-holding from that perspective, but we've had it for five years so there are always a few bumps in the road. We've had to call in for a few things, and they're really very professional. If we've needed to escalate issues, we've never had a problem doing that. Always been able to get to root cause, and in every case, been satisfied with the outcomes.

Five years ago, Wily Introscope was in place for a lot of our WebSphere infrastructure. At the time, we were actually looking at it more as an infrastructure tool. The guys supporting WAS, whether it be in Windows, AIX, Linux, or z/OS, needed something to give them a lot more visibility into what was going on, and Wily at the time just wasn't doing it. 

Wily Introscope was only lightly used at the time, but it just wasn't giving them the depth they needed. Realistically, nobody was using it. We had a product that was sitting there, unused. At the time there really was no APM-type thinking at all. It's kind of by chance since we moved to Dynatrace to satisfy that first requirement.

Since then, we've flipped it on its head, and we use the tool that much more from the app perspective. And that's really the way to do it. And we had no problem making that shift at all. We could still satisfy what the WAS team needed to do with the tool but get a lot more value out of it by giving app teams a lot more perspective. We've been able to get 500 percent more value out of it just by putting it with app teams as well.

One of the challenges, when we were looking through all the different solutions out there was, which one supported all of those things to give you that big picture? And Dynatrace met the mark. 

I was only loosely involved in the initial setup. At the time we brought Dynatrace in, it was one of my peers in the same larger group that was doing the evaluation. I was in the background, watching it. I then ended up inheriting the whole thing about a year later, so it was kind of good that I did have some visibility into it.

Overall, the initial setup was pretty straightforward.

We did a bake-off against some of the competitors at the time, and it was pretty clear Dynatrace was the best fit for our organization.

I know AppDynamics was one of the other ones we were evaluating, and IBM's offering, ITCAM. And given the different types of technologies we had to deal with, specifically mainframe, Dynatrace really stuck out as the one tool that could handle all the requirements we had at the time. And since then we've actually grown the use cases up quite significantly, and are even more happy with it.

When it comes to the nature of digital complexity, the role of AI - when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and manage performance properly - is huge. We saw it when moving to Dynatrace AppMon and started the Gen 2 platform and wondering how did we deal with problems just a few years ago without tools like this? Now we've gone into the Gen 3 platform space and really, with apps exploding from the perspective of complexity - as it's impossible to manually understand where all the moving parts are at any one time, where to look for a problem if it happens - AI really rolls all that up in a way that makes it useful, and we don't waste time trying to dig through things like we would have even with AppMon. So it's immensely important.

We still use siloed monitoring tools to some extent, and we've used quite a few of them. They have their place for what they do but, in reality, we've had to look at other aggregation-type tools and bringing feeds from each of those together. Let's say a Windows Server monitoring tool can tell you the CPU is higher, but it doesn't give you any perspective on what the actual impact is for the user of the app that's sitting on it. And that one server might only be a small cog in the wheel of the overall app. It's great at telling you what it does, but it doesn't go any further than that. You really need something that aggregates all those things together and has perspective. And that's really what app teams want. I think those tools are better served in the operations space, but then that's where they're stuck, they'll never go further than that.

If there was just one solution that could provide some real answers, as opposed to just data, the benefit would be that looking in multiple tools definitely slows you down. The fact that a tool like Dynatrace can bring all those things together and really help pop problems up right into your face is a huge time-saver. I don't know anyone that's got extra time on their hands at this point, so anything that helps us save time and get us to a resolution of a problem faster is of huge importance. Looking back, a few years back, trying to look at multiple tools to help us figure out problems, teams could spin for weeks because we'd have no idea where to look; classic war-room scenario, where everyone's pointing fingers at everyone else in the room, "It's not my problem." Dynatrace has really done a lot to help us get rid of those types of scenarios and be productive, really addressing actual issues.

I give it a nine out of 10. Compared to the other solutions out there, I'd still say it's top breed. It's great to see they're doing a lot more with the product on a big scale. But there are a few things they need to knock off the list to hit that 10; it's not perfect, but it's really, really good.

In terms of advice, the one thing that I've seen from other app teams internally: Do a PoC. It's much better to see your data in the tool than trying to demo it with easy travel or someone else's app. You just don't get the perspective of what they're looking at is some cases. Set it up, kick the tires, and give it a try, and that will win most people over.

Primary use case would be exposing application performance, and incidents and errors within the application. It has performed exceptionally well.

Understanding and visibility, and the ability to provide the same answers across the different archetypes of support personnel, maintenance personnel, business personnel, executives, middle managers like myself, where we're all telling the same story and we're all working off of that same story, to understand what's going on.

The main benefit has been time, definitely. Over my career I've spent hundreds, if not thousands, of hours in war rooms picking problems apart, over-analyzing issues, chasing red herrings, and this type of solution, or solution set, not just AppMon but Dynatrace, and even the Synthetic portion, really helps us narrow down what we're looking for.

Capture of 100% of the traffic. Exposure to downstream services, that might not necessarily be new, to everybody who's using applications. It triggers them and captures them and it gives visibility to some pieces that might be forgotten or even obscured.

If it is AppMon, I would really like ease of integration developed into Logstash. The business transaction data doesn't have a natural feed through the GUI, through the configuration. We have to do a little jiggering in between to get it to feed, so I'd like to have that out-of-the-box. That'd be great. We have now, out-of-the-box UEM integration, I'd like to have the rest out of the box as well.

And if it's Dynatrace we're talking about, I really think they're on the right track as it is, because of all the AI and all the session replay and all these fantastic things we've been shown.

And if it's the Dynatrace Synthetic which we also use, I would love to have higher-level analytics across the tests. Where today we get errors and generate them per test, but we have clusters of tests that are for the same application, I'd love to see a little bit more analysis done across series of tests, so that we can have higher roll-ups of actionable information.

This is an interesting question. We've had our challenges in the past because our primary tool over the five years has been AppMon, and AppMon has had a series of evolutions. We started with the 4.2 version and we've come all the way to version 7 at this point. It was never intended to be a high-availability solution or a clustered solution, and some of those improvements have been made more recently. But historically, it was fragile. 

Like I said, I have a very large implementation. Over six thousand agents with AppMon. Some of our servers are very highly loaded, over a thousand agents, and when we talk about our online banking, mobile banking platforms, we drive significant load and it can really impact the viability of the servers.

To be fair, we were pushing the product to its limits, and it even prompted some of the architectural changes within Dynatrace itself, and within the AppMon tool, to allow for larger footprints. But generally, and lately, it's been extremely stable.

The AppMon product hasn't been historically as scalable. That is one of the reasons we're really excited about Dynatrace product, because it was redesigned for scalable environments with scalability itself in mind.

The technical support has been fantastic, even getting right up to third-level support and getting changes overnight. 

A small anecdote: We needed some changes to the UE mobile agent and we needed them in a hurry. And support turned that ask around in two days, which was phenomenal.

And then, I started talking to some of the guys in Boston, Detroit about some of the exciting changes they're making for their support model where they can have off-site guardians. I actually employ two guardians myself at a time. I have them on a one year contract. Putting them in-house has been invaluable.

The idea of other organizations being able to use Dynatrace guardian hours, and doing it piece meal as they need it, is great because not everybody needs as much hand-holding, but everybody needs a little help some time. The response time and the knowledge has been tremendous.

We've used a number of tools. We've used SCOM and Wily Introscope and Groundworks. We've used Nagios, Zabbix. We've used HPE RUM which was terrible. It cost a lot of FT overhead. There have been a few others, I just can't remember them offhand.

A lot of them were siloed, very siloed approaches to monitoring. Some of them have similar approaches, DC RUM is the same as HPE RUM, but the manpower overhead is significant. The challenge there is they just don't talk to each other. And they're not providing the same information to the same people because people craft the output to what they want, and they're not trying to tell the same story. Dynatrace just attempts to tell the truth.

To be honest, I wasn't part of the board of smarty-pants that brought the solution in, but I can imagine the criteria they looked at included breadth of coverage of technologies, the cost, and ease of use. Either way, I thank that team because it changed our lives.

When it comes to the nature of digital complexity, the role of AI when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and manage performance problems is absolutely crucial. Last year I spent a large portion of my time doing an investigation into AI capabilities for IT operations, and I evaluated several products in the market space. I found they're all very, very immature, but it's an absolute necessity for us going forward. 

We're a very large bank and we have hundreds of thousands of users, thousands and thousands of applications. When you start scaling up to the cloud with microservices, the sheer volume of data is so massive that human beings can't evaluate it anymore. It's not possible. AI is the only way that we're going to be able to move forward into the future with these types of architectures, and still get the value out of the data that we're recording.

I've definitely used so many siloed monitoring tools in the past. The challenge is when it comes to clustering and high-availability - that type of solutioning where we look at strict node-based siloing and then application based siloing. Even then you're limiting yourself to the purview of what's in that container or what's in that application, and if you're not looking outside of yourself then you're really just looking for a culture of "not me," instead of fostering a culture of this is what it is. Let's work together.

If we had just one solution that could provide real access and not just top line data, I think it would probably free us up in terms of manpower and work hours, to allow us to do more value-add things. If all we're doing is working with top level data, then you have to spend a lot more time digging deeper to find your cause or to find actionable insights into the applications, and that chews up manpower. In this day and age, IT overhead really has become "Let's look at the employee first and cut that first." So, if we need to move in that direction, having something that provides real answers helps us to make that adjustment.

I rate Dynatrace an eight out of 10. I never want to give a perfect score because there's always room for improvement. But it's been a great journey for me and I look forward to many more years with it.

I'd recommend you look at Dynatrace. It's really the only one worth looking at.

We use it for monitoring all the applications in our bank, and it works fantastically. 

We know it is a primary part of it and we use it for everything. It is starting to become a culture differential. People are starting to understand what it is and what it can give them. It is a slow process, but it is really changing and it is making people start to understand how their applications work.

• Root cause analysis
• Problem solving

Deeper dive on the Dynatrace web versions, so we can get down to the packets if it is available. The ability for business transactions in application automatic deciphering.

The integration of the tools is getting there. It is still not there yet, because we still have to get a lot of tools to put together.

It is sometimes good, sometimes bad, but most of the time it is getting better. Some of it is the installation and configuration, we screwed it up. The other side of it is that sometimes we have issues with the code on their side. We like to get it fixed.

Scalability is getting better. It has had its issues. We have scaled it very large, and it is getting better. The newest version will scale, but we have not tested it yet.

When it's something technical support can fix, it is very good. When it is something they can't fix, and it is either an environmental area or something they need to work on it sometimes can take time to get done.

They take a reasonable amount of time if it is on the roadmap, but if it is not on the roadmap, then it does take awhile. 

We have used siloed monitoring tools in the past. I have a big problem with silo. Silos never solve a problem. 

I am a trouble shooter. I used to have break silos. Silos are the not "ME" generation. Not me, not me, not me. We had to break that. Sometimes silos caused people anger and stepped on people's toes. It just made people say "Not me, it's not my job," but they found, when you break them, it opens up reality. 

There are the tools that are better, but overall, it is the best suite out there. 

Do tests. Do PoCs to make sure that it fits in your environment, because there are a lot of different ways of doing things, and if you find out that it fits your environment, do use it. It is a fantastic tool, but you have to learn how to use it.

The role of AI has become very important when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and manage performance problems. The more complex digital gets, the more important AI is when it is done right, because it takes less time to do things. It filters through all the garbage, so you do not have to pay somebody to it, and it takes care to do a good job.

If I had just one solution which could provide real answers, not just data, it would affect our team and every team in the world if it was done properly very well. 

Most important criteria when evaluating products:

1. Does it work.
2. Don't listen to the FUD.
3. Make sure it does what you want to do under the load that you want to do it.

Our primary use is for DevOps. As far as that's concerned, it's been a great tool for finding where transactions are slow, at the development stage.

The main benefits have been getting to root cause on certain issues, being able to deploy applications faster because of the way that you can troubleshoot those issues. So delivering products to our business and driving revenue have improved.

The fact that you can drill down to the code level and get a breadth of information. We do use it for a little bit of troubleshooting in production so that's been a great feature.

I think they've already touched on it at this Performance 2018 conference: enterprise monitoring in a single solution for all of your monitoring needs, whether it's infrastructure, application; having that whole holistic view. Having something high level, in terms of dashboards implemented to provide executives with answers. I think that's the direction it seems that they're going and that's the direction that, hopefully, they'll continue in.

It's very stable. It's very powerful but it's extremely stable. We hardly have any issues from a stability standpoint. Our main problems have been that it has a high learning curve to it. I've used it for about three years now and I'm still learning it. But I feel it's pretty stable.

It's easy to scale. It's costly, but it's easy to scale up. I haven't seen any issues in terms of increasing our user base or the number of the agents that we have deployed, so I think it's pretty easy in that respect.

I submit a ticket once every week or every two weeks. They always have been pretty comprehensive in their responses. They're also quick when it comes to responding to our tickets.

I think they may have been using ManageEngine Applications Manager monitoring. It's not quite as in depth as the level of information that Dynatrace can provide. It provides some pretty basic application-health type monitoring but not to the code level that Dynatrace provides. So I think that was the solution. We still use application monitoring since it's relatively cheaper than Dynatrace. So we use it for application teams that may not want to spend the money on a Dynatrace license.

I was not involved in the initial setup. But I can imagine it was complex due to the high learning curve. There was also some complexity in the adoption rate of it because of how costly the licensing is. So getting application teams to spend the money to use it, I think was one of the biggest hurdles.

Given the nature of digital complexity, the role of AI when it comes to IT's ability to scale it in the Cloud and manage performance problems is very important because our brain, humans, are only able to compute so many things. AI can take a whole bunch of data and turn that into something that we can create more data out of. We can have several million lines of code and AI can detect if there's anything wrong, without us having to look at it manually.

Regarding siloed monitoring tools, we use infrastructure monitoring tools and application-specific monitoring tools. Getting them in to a single dashboard has been a challenge, because our executives don't want to log in to different tools to view our enterprise, they want to see it in one page. So that's been a problem with those siloed tools.

If there was one solution that provided real answers as opposed to just data, it would help executives who just want one view and just a single page of answers for problems. So that would benefit us greatly.

I would rate it about an eight out of 10. For me, personally, I mentioned it before, it has a high learning curve. They probably did provide a comprehensive training when they first rolled it out, before my time with the tool, so I didn't get a chance to take advantage of that. There are some videos and there is some documentation out there, but it still requires you to delve into the tool to learn it. Because applications are very complex and very different, creating a training video to set up some basic monitoring would probably be a little hard. But a little bit more comprehensive self-paced training would help.

I would suggest you evaluate what you want out of it. It has a load of information and if that's what you want, if you're looking at it from a DevOps standpoint, then Dynatrace is a great tool for DevOps. But if you're looking at it from merely a monitoring standpoint, it might be too much of a tool for that purpose.

To detect performance issues and user experience, as well.

It performs very well.

It saves the company money.

The ability to detect the issue before it's a major cost.

I'd like to see self-healing and I'd also like to see more automation. It looks like is that's the direction Dynatrace is heading in, in their Dynatrace product.

We haven't had any downtime when using Dynatrace.

It is highly scalable.

Tech support is slow.

Going from the dev department back to the front-end customer service, then back to the dev. Then it just goes back and forth, back and forth, until they finally find a resolution. If you don't push through, then they won't resolve the issue right away. So you have to keep pushing, or they're going to just say, "You need to update."

Straightforward. We did it in-house.

I've tried other ones out, AppDynamics and others, as well. What made Dynatrace stand out was ease of use. It more intuitive.

Regarding the importance of the role of AI when it comes to IT's ability to scale in the cloud and manage performance problems, I believe that's the future, the correct direction that we're heading in. We're not in the cloud yet.

We've used siloed monitoring tools in the past. The challenge with that is that one person has all the knowledge, and then when they leave, you're left with nothing. Also, those tools are high-maintenance and there's a lot more manpower going into them.

If there was just one solution that could provide real answers and not just data, so it would tell you, "This is the problem. This is how you would solve it," the immediate benefit for our team would be helping diagnose issues quicker. Self-healing would be ideal.

My most important criteria when selecting a vendor are that it has to be scalable, and I appreciate the forums.

Keep your options open, but Dynatrace is one of the major companies that can resolve your issues.