Splunk AppDynamics Reviews

I use the solution in my company for application performance monitoring.

The most valuable features of the solution are diagnostic sessions and alerts. The diagnostic features and ability to create custom dashboards are the key features of the tool.

The integration ability of AppDynamics with other performance testing tools is an area with shortcomings where improvements are required.

I have been using AppDynamics for two to three years.

It is a stable solution.

My company has purchased a scalable version of the product.

I have experience with the solution's technical support. The solution's technical support is fine and responsive. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase was difficult. There is a need for those involved in the setup process to go through the proper documentation and training available from AppDynamics.

I rate the product's initial setup phase a four on a scale of one to ten, where one is the difficult setup process, and ten is the easy setup phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The product's deployment phase is taken care of by our company's DevOps team.

The tool is expensive.

My company chose AppDynamics over other products in the market since we found it to be the most compatible tool with the products we used in our organization.

The product's installation process is a bit difficult. Users need to thoroughly understand the documentation and take care of the setup phase to be able to use certain features offered by the tool, which, technically, is something that users should be able to use. Generating heap dump for Java usage and Java application monitoring are areas that can be pretty difficult with the product.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

The solution is used for observability, AIOps, monitoring microservices, SAP monitoring, and application performance monitoring.

AppDynamics is predominantly marketed and sold as an APM solution. Customers use it for both database and application monitoring. I have not seen a customer buying AppDynamics only for database monitoring. The product is good at database monitoring, availability and performance monitoring. I have always used it as a holistic product.

The product requires high maintenance. We need a dedicated resource to manage it because the solution manages a complex environment.

I’ve been using the solution as a system integrator for eight years.

The tool is stable, but our clients are not using its features to the fullest due to a lack of knowledge of APM. The customers are not very clear on what features an APM product offers. Customers have a limited understanding of APM and its use cases.

The tool’s scalability is good. Our customers are enterprise-level businesses such as large hospitals, manufacturers, and banks.

Technical support is good. Support must provide faster responses for production-related issues.

Positive

We have used ManageEngine before. AppDynamics is better than the other products we have used. The tool provides a pretty good user experience. The dashboards are very well-defined. Business-related data is very well projected on the dashboards. The technical team also gets good information on their dashboards.

AppDynamics monitors pretty much all the applications, though the applications are built on various technologies. ManageEngine has a limitation. It cannot monitor various technologies. The most important factor is security. Security is very well defined in AppDynamics, whereas ManageEngine's security is not up to the mark.

The initial setup is neither easy nor very difficult. It requires specific knowledge of the infrastructure. When installing the product, we must be aware of how it will be configured at the database, application, and infrastructure levels. Earlier, the tool was deployed on-premises. Nowadays, customers are willing to deploy it on the cloud.

Typically, to install the product, we take help from infrastructure experts. We need to be aware of the infrastructure before installing the product. The deployment takes seven to ten days. We need one architect and two engineers to deploy the product. The number of resources required to maintain the solution depends on the environment. We need two resources for medium-sized environments, but we may need four to five resources for larger environments.

One of the main downsides to the solution is its cost. We pay a yearly licensing fee for the product. AppDynamics and Dynatrace have almost the same pricing. Compared to ManageEngine, AppDynamics is relatively higher in cost. For cloud-based solutions, users only pay for licenses if they opt for a subscription. However, for on-premises solutions, they must buy support separately.

The application layer in AppDynamics performs fairly well. However, network monitoring is not at an advanced level. It is mediocre.

People wanting to use the solution must not use it only for database monitoring. It should be used for end-to-end application performance monitoring. If someone has requirements involving applications, observability, and AIOps, they must consider the product. If they need only database monitoring, several other tools are available in the market that are lower in cost and offer a lot of capabilities.

When it comes to end-to-end monitoring, network monitoring also plays a crucial role. It is an area of improvement for AppDynamics. Network monitoring could be better. AppDynamics has acquired a product called ThousandEyes. How well the product grows in the network monitoring space is yet to be seen.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring has multiple use cases, including long queries, database performance, and database query details, which we have shared with the operations team.

There are multiple uses related to performance. The first is the DB connection tool, in which we have shared the details related to application performance and DB performance enhancement. In most cases, they have checked their connection, sizing and acted accordingly. For the long query details, they have performed their queries, reduced the time, and enhanced their performance.

The features related to the application performance in AppDynamics Database Monitoring are the most valuable. AppDynamics Database Monitoring has corrected its application-level code and enhanced its application performance.

The application end of AppDynamics Database Monitoring needs to improve by checking which applications consume licenses. We are not getting any details from the AppDynamics Database Monitoring portal. AppDynamics Database Monitoring's agent details must be enhanced, so each agent needs to show what kind of technology is being used. I would like to have agent details from AppDynamics Database Monitoring.

We are not getting related information and agent details from AppDynamics Database Monitoring. For example, if we have one hundred APM licenses and have onboarded multiple applications, there are no details about which technology uses which kind of agent.

Other solutions have one agent that gathers information on all kinds of server components. However, with AppDynamics Database Monitoring, we don't have any universal solution related to application instrumentation, server performance, stats, server component stats, and service stats. We would like to have better server components.

I have been using AppDynamics Database Monitoring for more than seven years.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring has high stability. I rate AppDynamics Database Monitoring a ten out of ten for stability.

I rate AppDynamics Database Monitoring a ten out of ten for scalability. More than 1,500 people are using the solution in our organization.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring provides high-quality technical support.

Positive

Before AppDynamics Database Monitoring, we used a different solution. We switched to AppDynamics Database Monitoring for multiple reasons related to end user experience.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring’s initial setup needs to be made easier. I rate the solution’s initial setup a five out of ten.

We implemented AppDynamics Database Monitoring through an in-house team of three members. AppDynamics Database Monitoring’s deployment takes around five to six hours. We get the information from the end user related to their application architecture, and according to that information, we plan and perform the implementation.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring does not require any maintenance. I highly recommend others to use AppDynamics Database Monitoring.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring's end-user experience is very good. The solution's tool navigation is very simple and clear-cut. Also, the error and exception detail AppDynamics Database Monitoring shared are crystal clear.

Overall, I rate AppDynamics Database Monitoring a ten out of ten.

We use AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring to monitor the performance of applications. We use the solution to see the errors, snapshots, and exceptions in the backend and front end of our applications. We also use AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring for frontend monitoring, end-user monitoring, checking the response time, and other frontend metrics. We also use the dashboard in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring and also use the solution for sending error or issue alerts to our clients.

The best feature of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that it lets you find errors in synthetic jobs ahead of the users. The solution shows you all front-end metrics. You can also see JavaScript errors and jQuery errors through AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring. You can also do a correlation between the front end and the backend, or from the user to the navigator, to the backend through the solution.

What could be improved in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for the synthetic jobs or synthetic agents, in particular, you can't do a lot of tests with just one agent. You have to install a lot of agents if you want to do more tests, so this is an area for improvement in the solution.

Another area for improvement in AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that you're only able to see basic metrics in the absence of server or database visibility.

For the SaaS version of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring, my team just downloaded then installed the extension in an application in Azure to see the application on the controller, so if this can be done in the on-premise version of the solution as well, without needing to install the agent on the machine, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring better. Currently, the .NET agent consumes the CPU or memory and clients usually raise this issue with my team, so it would be good if the on-premises version doesn't require agent installation on the machine.

Another functionality I'd like to see in the next release of AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is for it to receive updates from the file config without needing to reset IIS because right now when you do a modification in IIS, you have to restart IIS. When you add a service to the agent config, you have to restart IIS. For the product server, it's not possible to reset IIS after you make changes to the config file, so if this could be improved, then it would make AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a better solution.

I have about two years of experience with AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring.

AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is a stable solution.

AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring has good scalability.

Support for AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is always available. My team does a lot of Webex with support. Whenever you have a problem with the solution, you can always contact support.

As a developer, I have no idea about the pricing for AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring. Another team is in charge of the licensing for the solution.

Currently, AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is deployed on-premises, but my team is also testing its SaaS version.

My advice to anyone considering AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is that it's a very important product because you can use it to troubleshoot and detect errors in your applications.

I'm rating AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring as ten out of ten.

We were using an ID integration, and we were monitoring and using the EPM, et cetera. AppDynamics is able to provide us with in-depth insight into the bottlenecks in the system.

It allows us to understand what is causing latency in the system. Using AppDynamics, we can drill down to the code on which the bottleneck is seen, and the developers can fix the issues, increasing the overall application's performance.

The tag and follow aspects are very good. Basically, how the transaction is moving through various servers. We can see everything via a dashboard, a visual dashboard, that can showcase transactions.

It's pretty stable.

We can scale the solution as needed. 

We'd like to see features that could support IBM's Integration Bus. AppDynamics is unable to provide the details for all the flows in the system transaction flow. That component needs work.

The initial setup is a bit complex.

It was quite expensive.

I've been using the solution for two years. 

We only really run into issues during the upgrade process. Other than that, it is stable and reliable. the performance is good, and there are no bugs or glitches. 

It's a scalable product. If a company wants to expand, it can do so. 

We have between 150 and 200 users right now. We do not have plans to increase usage. 

Technical support has been helpful in general. 

Positive

We were using DynaRisk. However, it did not meet the needs of our use cases. 

We found the initial setup to be a bit difficult. It's not perfectly straightforward. 

There are two or three people on hand that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks.

We handled the setup ourselves in-house. We did not need any outside assistance.

We have not really noted any ROI.

It's a very expensive product. Each of the licenses after this month for one server is around $9,000 or $10,000. Therefore, monitoring one server concerning analytics or server monitoring is pretty expensive.

Before beginning, a new user should take time to understand the product. They need to analyze a few options and see which best fits their use case and go with that. There are many on the market to look at, including DynaRisk and DataDog.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

There are certain limitations with the agents in the solution. For some applications, AppDynamics Server Monitoring provides agents only for Linux-based machines.

When our organization deals with environments where only Windows-based applications are running, we face challenges using AppDynamics Server Monitoring. Some community-based agents are available with a solution that utilizes the CPU and memory of the hardware devices in excess. 

The vendor should make changes to support Windows-based applications or develop single agents to support all applications. Recently, a single agent feature was announced; if it's easy to use, then the solution will have an edge over others and simplify the deployment process. 

I have been using AppDynamics Server Monitoring for one or two years. 

I would rate the stability a nine out of ten. 

There are about 15 users of AppDynamics Server Monitoring in our organization. At our company, we try to avoid frequent or regular maintenance of the solution as it can disturb daily operations. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. If the deployed environment grows, there are no challenges in increasing the resources in the solution, hence the solution can be easily scaled. 

The tech support from the vendor is satisfying. I would rate the tech support an eight out of ten. 

Positive

There are some complexities in the initial deployment process of AppDynamics Server Monitoring. It's an agent-based solution, so there are different agents for varying apps, the compatibility of the agent with the app is not straightforward. When our company's team is installing the agents, they are facing some challenges related to agent compatibility and product performance. The main controller setup of the solution is comprehensible. 

The installation of AppDynamics Server Monitoring takes more than a week in total. The main controller can be installed within a day, but the agent installation for different applications takes around a week.  

The licensing cost is fairly high. I would rate the pricing an eight out of ten. There are no additional costs to the standard licensing fees for AppDynamics Server Monitoring. 

Customers of our company use the solution to monitor servers in digital banking, online banking applications and other financial entities. AppDynamics Server Monitoring is a user-friendly solution. The dashboard, flow providing maps of varying applications and the back-end calls are easy to understand in the solution. 

The alerting mechanism works satisfactorily and efficiently as other solutions. Notifications are provided in the dashboard, or they can also be sent to users via email or SMS by AppDynamics Server Monitoring, other solution don't have multiple alerting options. 

After implementing the solution, we haven't witnessed any operational cost reduction, but performance improvements have been identified. The solution has provided exceptional root cause analysis and technical solutions for problem identification and resolution. 

The correlation feature available with AppDynamics Server Monitoring is absent in other competitive solutions. The aforementioned feature helps evaluate the impact of one application's issues on the other, pinpoint the error location, and check the dependency between applications. Compared to the NMS, the APM can provide more information on user monitoring. 

Some security features and threat loophole identification features can be included in AppDynamics Server Monitoring by the vendor. As the solution also maintains baselining, it can take a proactive approach based on historical data to gain AI capabilities. If AI features are included, then AppDynamics Server Monitoring will probably be able to predict upcoming application failure by analyzing some metrics that have gone down. 

I would recommend AppDynamics Server Monitoring to other users due to its user-friendliness. A Competitor solution from Dynatrace provides almost the same features as AppDynamics Server Monitoring, but their dashboards and overall usability are quite complex. Many financial sector companies and government organizations often prefer an on-prem version, which is provided by AppDynamics Server Monitoring, but other solutions like Datadog are available as SaaS. I would rate AppDynamics Server Monitoring as nine out of ten. 

We're a bank. We do use the predictive tools for the different products of the bank and the application which the bank utilizes.

AppD improves the productivity of Application Engineers, development teams, and other integrated items. Slowness or leak issue is a nut for the team now. Also, the team resolves or understands the network and query path every easy and resolves efficiently.

Our application uptime, increased by 10%, and overall productivity up by 30%.

Ticket or issue down by 12% over five years of use and experience.

Open to be applied and test any area and suite.

The tracing is the most important aspect of the solution. The way it traces the information within the particular application or within the particular infrastructure is great. That actually helps. Apart from that, all of the data that's in the production APM is good.  

Technical support is helpful.

The solution scales well.

The stability is good. 

We do have a combination of areas that need improvement. We do have the integration, such as end-user integration and experience that could be better. It is not just from the response point of view; it is more from the error and error detection point of view. This is due to the fact that these are all the banking applications as used by the banking staff, not by the end-user directly. Based on the banking staff feedback, based on the staff security or maybe dealing with the capital market, there needs to be some improvement.

They do provide the input growth on a daily basis in terms of what is coming in and how we receive the applications and how many we have. We've now started looking for a particular product that can make sure that it should connect with files and statements inside the product. 

The IO ratio, which we are looking for in terms of a report, is one of the concerns. We do monitor those details from AppDynamics, however, reporting and monitoring could be better.

There needs to be more analytics. That is what we are missing from the tool point of view. We need more information geared more towards helping us in making better decisions. When you do the coding that's for a banking situation or maybe in the incidents or capital market, it becomes very important that how much time I'm investing inside the transaction. A transaction which needs to be carried out for either confirming the payments or maybe either releasing the payments - these kinds of things. What I have seen with the use, as of now, is a bit of a lag when we are running on the global cloud or the public clouds, like Azure or the Google platform. 

Right now, we are fighting between three different stakeholders. With the networks, we have a different chat, with the vendors we have a different chat, and with the application team, we have a different chat. This approach doesn't provide a holistic view. Everyone has their own excuses and everyone has their own reasoning and conditions. 

If it can be able to intelligently provide all the things we need to look at, from a data point of view, that would be very useful.

I would say that I have between seven and eight years of experience, hands-on. However, later on in the time frame, over the last four or five years, I have not has as much hands-on experience with the tool. I'm more involved in various solution discussions and strategy building with the platform on top of the tool.

I would say it's very steady and for now, it's very reliable as well. It's stable. We don't have issues with bugs or crashes. 

The solution is very scalable so far in any testing scenario. It performs very well and gives us the expected output which we are looking to improve. 

We are using the solution for more than 600 small and big applications. We have around 78,000 people, including the back-end staff and the development team, that use the solution.

Overall, technical support has been very good. We're very satisfied with their level of support. So far, it's been very good for the bank.

Positive

We have used HPE BSM (now called MF APM). 

Due to these factors, we switch:

1. Costly

2. Implementation complexity

3. Multiple products and Integration

4. Not end-user friendly. 

I was not involved in the initial implementation. Nowadays, the way we approach the teams, sometimes it's very easy when it's an application with a known language like Python or maybe with Ruby or a kind of Java application. In terms of gateways inside the product, sometimes it is very tough, and sometimes it is very easy to get deployed. We're not using any out-of-the-box security. 

We have used model Train for the trainers and enforced all employees with operational training.

We achieve a great number, in terms of applications user availability increase by 30%. In treading, and agents, needs a smooth performance before the market starts. AppD provide a depth to measure any performances challenges, leak issue or even a chain linked issue story.

The pricing is a mixed bag. In some areas they are reasonably priced, however, in others, it's a bit expensive. 

We look for ease of implementation, diagnostics information shared, and controls to the team for working.

We're just an end-user of the product.

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

The deployment model depends on the solution or the size of the product which we are using, as the banks do have private and public clouds. In public clouds, we don't have much of the production instances. It's mainly the development. The free cloud and the cloud environment are completely on a private or in-house, on-premises solution with different ecosystems.

If a proper study has been done, and the solution makes sense for the company, I would recommend the solution. 

I would like to rate the solution at a seven out of ten. That consideration is mainly due to the fact that it covers a large portfolio of the product. It does have support for many other ERP tools. A lot of open customization is available and the product support team can help to customize the product. I've found this tool very useful and helpful on that.

I use AppDynamics when there's a performance issue with an application, but if it's a network-related performance issue, I use Accedian Skylight.

What I like best about AppDynamics is that it's functional, particularly in APM in Java and .NET.

What needs improvement in AppDynamics is installation. The installation process needs to be more straightforward. Deploying the product is also tricky, so this is an area for improvement.

Pricing is another area for improvement in AppDynamics because its current pricing model is no longer suited to containers and technologies.

The product used to be the best in the market ten years ago, but it now needs to regain its position as the leading product in its niche.

I've been using AppDynamics for ten years. I started my job ten years ago and remained in this area.

In terms of stability, AppDynamics is a four out of ten.

Scalability is the product's performance when you scale, and because the company is a SaaS company, it's not a very big deal. However, AppDynamics uses a MySQL database behind the engine, which is not the best for keeping metrics.

The solution could be more scalable and dynamic in terms of installation and configuration. Scalability-wise, AppDynamics is a four out of ten.

The support for AppDynamics used to be very good, and now it could be better. The support team could be more knowledgeable.

The technical support for AppDynamics is a four out of ten for me.

Neutral

I'm using AppDynamics, Datadog, and Dynatrace simultaneously.

Setting up and configuring AppDynamics is challenging because you need to give specific names to every container and server you deploy. Each name has to be unique, so it isn't easy to think of names in terms of dynamic environments. This means that when you move to microservices, AppDynamics has a very complex setup.

I'd rate the setup for the product as two out of ten.

The pricing model for AppDynamics isn't good. You have to subscribe to a yearly or a three-year licensing, which isn't very handy.

You buy a license for five hundred containers for a very large application, and you only need the containers for a limited time in that domain. For example, you only need five hundred containers once in that specific year, but you must buy five hundred licenses.

The current AppDynamics pricing model isn't fair. It's one out of ten pricing-wise. The solution is one of the most expensive in the market today.

I've switched to solutions such as Dynatrace, Datadog, and AppDynamics.

My rating for AppDynamics is four out of ten because it has a lot of room for improvement.