Splunk AppDynamics Reviews

We work in the banking industry and we deal with business transactions, including responses for the users. We capture all of the traffic in our AppDynamics platform. It is a really good application tool.

Application monitoring is the most valuable feature.

More native support for other hardware is needed because having to install various extensions and perform extra setup for different devices is really challenging, and not as easy or straightforward as it is in other products.

We have been working with AppDynamics for almost two and a half years.

This is a stable product and we definitely plan to continue using it in the future.

AppDynamics is really scalable. We have a private server on-premises and we haven't had any trouble with scaling. We have more than 1,000 people who are using it.

We use the support portal whenever we face an issue or any kind of problem, then we create a ticket and they assist us.

I am an IT monitoring specialist and I work with similar tools like Geneos and Splunk.

Geneos is straightforward and has different options for infrastructure monitoring. For example, if you have other hardware or memory, then these things are basic. With AppDynamics, these things require that we use extensions, follow the steps, and do the extra setup. These things are really challenging and it's not that easy to handle, the way it is with Geneos.

The people we know who are using Geneos are really happy with it and they think once or twice before moving to AppDynamics. In our case, we have moved to AppDynamics.

The initial setup is straightforward. We downloaded it from the AppDynamics resources, and they had already mentioned the installation steps. We followed the directions and it was easy to handle. It probably took about 30 minutes.

Although we deployed on-premises, we are planning on migrating to the cloud.

Initially, we had a consultant for the installation. Now, we do all of the upgrades by ourselves. We manage it with a team of four people.

The people who work on it are from my team, as well as from production and from pre-sales.

This is absolutely a product that I would recommend to other users. I can see a lot of people are interested in using AppDynamics.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use multiple APMs, but for smaller projects AppDynamics is too cost-prohibitive. It is a more expensive APM among the competitors, which is fine because it also does a lot more on the auto-detection and the AI side. It also supports a lot more languages. So whenever we hit a project that has the budget and the need, we look to use AppDynamics, especially if the technologies are complicated.

If somebody has a very simple two-tier Python or Node, we can use almost any APM. When we're dealing with somebody who has 50 or 60 tiers, some traditional stuff, some microservices; some stuff is in containers, some stuff is in real instances; there's Node and there's PHP, and there's a bit of C code in there somewhere. This is where we hit a complex case. It's usually a larger app, an app that has existed and evolved over time with many modules at play, making it almost different products, but it's all one big product. This is the type of case where we look towards AppDynamics because we can just drop it in and have it work.

We can't do that with the other APMs that we work with because they just wouldn't work. They'll do this little silo or that little silo, but they won't work with everything. With few exceptions, we have not found any production code that we couldn't make work with AppDynamics.

I can't compare how it makes things better within my company. That would be like asking someone how air makes their life better.

I don't say that lightly. I've been in other companies in the past without APM. Some of our projects don't have budget for APM at all. They're smaller projects, or they're from a smaller client who can't afford it, or in some cases, they don't want APM. Comparing it to that would be the easiest thing. In those cases, if the project is going right and there are no problems that are noticed, it's fine. But we've had a few carrier projects where there are unknown performance issues or unknown crashes or we're seeing, at 3 p.m., when it's not even a high-traffic period, that everything falls apart all of a sudden: The database is not good on connections; or we see the connections, but we don't easily understand why they're there. In those situations, the projects that don't have APM usually spend more on people hours than the APM product would have cost.

In that case, it's made things better by making it faster to troubleshoot and easier to troubleshoot. We don't want our most skilled people spending 40 hours to find one hotspot, when it could take them 30 minutes. It's not a value-add to let them do that manual, old-school troubleshooting. In fact, even on the projects that have, in some cases, not had the budget to buy the agents that we need, sometimes it has boiled down to using a PoC license, with their permission, to try to prove the value. Some of those clients went ahead and bought it. They understood it was, "Look guys, we can charge you 80 hours of troubleshooting, or you can just buy this license." I don't want to claim that that's every case, but there have been a couple cases where we've converted people and the client has accepted APM - where they might have been hostile toward it - after seeing the value of it.

In every APM tool, and this is true in AppDynamics as well, it's that waterfall view where I can see my code hotspots. In APM, it always comes back to that. It's great to have reporting. It's great to have that alerting: Tell me when something deviates from my normal conditions. All the analytic functionality is good for telling me what code to look at. But ultimately, I can't live without that code-level trace. I have to know where things are hot so that I can help the developer with what they actually need to fix. I can't just tell them the app is slow. That's always been the most important thing. In AppDynamics, they make that easier.

There are other products I won't name where you go in and you're looking at 50,000 traces. There's no way to sort and organize those particular traces. In AppDynamics, everywhere I go, there's some sort of grouping and aggregation function, or there's some sort of timeline that lets me zero in more quickly on the traces that I need. They go to more pains to aggregate and bubble the important ones to the top. That removes a lot of manual work; for example, sorting by the ones that took more than a second. I don't have to do that in AppDynamics. Sometimes I do so, in the course of troubleshooting, but for the most part, it tells me. I click on a trace. It's usually a trace that matters, that I can take action on, and that I can have a real impact on.

All those millions and, in some cases billions, of traces, over the course of a couple months, get aggregated into one view that's manageable. The other APMs are good if we don't have millions of requests. As soon as I get into that threshold, I can't look at that many traces anymore, they don't have great ways of looking at the traces in aggregate.

What I would like to see might exist, but if it does I haven't seen it. I would like to see something that lets me set real dollar figures, not just to outages, but to the solutions as well. It seems like a gimmicky feature, but for anyone who has to justify their budget within a larger area of the company, or to a client, it would be helpful. I don't want to have it in my face constantly, but I want to be able to access it when I'm looking at problems and have found a problem that I know I need to address. I could flag it off and have AppDynamics estimate how long a person would have taken to find that without it. That would give me a lot of leverage for justifying the existence of APM, which I really need.

Also, I know this is a holdout, we saw this ten years ago, where APM products were starting to crosstalk between each other. I would like to see a return to that because we do use multiple products. I understand that some of the information is in silos, but some of it isn't. If some of this exists, I might have missed it, but I would love to have an integration where I'm looking through logs in Elasticsearch and I could click on my AppDynamics link, because they have a little module, type in the credentials and be logged into AppDynamics. And similarly with the AppDynamics interface: "Oh, look. This server is having an issue. Okay. All this is good info, but maybe I want to take a look in Grafana." I would click over and it would take me to that spot in Grafana: the same time frame, the same filters and place to get me to that particular server, or instance, or container, etc. I would like to see that cross-functionality with some of the more common tools.

Most people run Elasticsearch or Kibana or similar things. Most people run a Grafana or something like that. I'm not expecting them to integrate with their competitors - that might be a hairy situation, although a nice one for us, on the consumer side - but if that type of integration was possible with some of the major, open-source, complementary products, that would be nice, and some of the commercial ones too.

We saw that in the APM space ten years ago, a little bit. There were a couple movements towards that, but I haven't seen that since as much.

I've been using AppDynamics for almost a decade. In that time, I've seen it run on literally hundreds of applications in that time, and I can quite honestly think of only one situation where it introduced stability problems. I pegged a little of the blame on AppDynamics but a little bit on the app as well. That's pretty good.

There are a lot of products in the APM space, and I've used a lot of them, that have very consistent performance problems, stability problems, or crashing that they'll introduce into the app. The fact that we've only encountered that once, and it was almost a decade ago and it was an exceptional case, is pretty good.

I've never really heard of stability problems and we've used it in some pretty highly important, high-volume apps.

The scalability is excellent. We've never encountered a situation, under loads that we've seen, where we could not scale to meet the needs. We're not running the world's top-ten websites, but we are doing some very high transactions on some very large properties, with a lot of calls. There are very few applications I can imagine that would have scalability issues using AppDynamics. We've seen that across technologies: Some of them are PHP apps, some of them are .NET apps, some of them are a mixture of all of the above. We have yet to see it cap out or not be able to scale.

We've received technical support in two areas.

On the pre-sales side, it's always been extremely professional, really great, even in smaller license situations. If there's somebody available and within a radius that can realistically come to a meeting, they often will. They've worked through some very peculiar application setups with us, where we're not sure how we're going to approach it. We've always been very pleased on that side.

On the post-sales side, as well, once it's deployed, we haven't had to use them a lot. There haven't been a lot of things we've had to contact them about, but where we have, the issues have mostly been around things like training, or understanding. We just haven't seen that many problems. We've always found the training material to be very descriptive. They've always taken the time to hand-hold us through: "Okay, this is what you're seeing, and this is why you're seeing it. Why don't you go look at this in the app." They've always taken the time.

I can't comment on the troubleshooting side because we haven't needed to do it. We may have had a minor case where we needed a quick answer to a license issue or we couldn't figure out why an agent wasn't connecting. They've always been excellent there, but we haven't encountered an "Oh my God," big issue, where it wasn't just something stupid, that we were overlooking. They've been great on that. They've been able to identify those things, but we haven't had to use them a lot on the post-sales side of things.

In terms of the integration and configuration of AppDynamics in our AWS environment, it's been pretty seamless. It doesn't matter if we've been using real instances or if we're using a Kubernetes environment or a docker environment - we've got quite a few different environments. We've never encountered an integration problem, or any issues deploying either manually or via our automation scripts. It's always packaged in very nicely with them.

I can't think of any problems we've encountered that I could critique.

The Kubernetes deployment is three lines of code or one command. They've made it amazingly simple. We just put in into a config file and everything pretty much just goes in a modern environment.

The only one that's been hard is some of the compiled apps on C, but that's such a rare case and it's only hard because it's been a non-.NET compiled app. Everything else has been seamless and just one click. The C apps are rare and we know they're going to be hard, that's just the nature of the way they're designed.

All of our database endpoints were connected, all of our third-party endpoints. Anytime we've had to use the JavaScript on the app it's been seamless. They don't break our sub-calls by accidentally putting them in there.

All of the integration from browser JavaScript to code, through to the database proxy have been seamless for us.

With very few exceptions, we can justify the cost per project and definitely, in the wash of things, it saves money, overall. The only problem that we've had with this is sometimes trying to show that justification.

It's really easy sometimes, where we spend 30 minutes or an hour on the interface and we find a laundry list of problems that we've got to address; big problems. Somebody who's not familiar with APM on the client side will look into and say, "That's it. Why did we need that product for that?" You needed that product because it took 30 minutes instead of weeks and customer complaints, etc.

The product has always been worth it, but trying to bubble up the value has not, I admit, been easy, because there's no value attached to a problem that we find. That's the only problem we've encountered around cost. We have always been able to justify it.

We actively use Instana for some cases as well, and sometimes we use Instana and AppDynamics side-by-side. We do use Dynatrace and have used Dynatrace in the past. Those are the ones that we're using today.

We've used and evaluated, at some point in time over the last ten years, another dozen vendors. The choice is not made lightly. We've actually tested all the other ones.

There is some stuff that everyone supports. Every APM supports Java. If somebody has a simple Java app, any APM is usually going to work. It's not going to be as stable, sometimes, but when we get into the real-world apps where you have a heterogeneous network of different technologies at play on a mixture of platforms, that's where a lot of the APM tools stop working as well as AppDynamics works.

Through our history, AppDynamics has always been the one on top of making sure that it continues to work. It works from the database through to the browser, whether it's a mobile or a desktop. I can see that full interaction. I don't get that out of any other APM with as many platforms.

I see a lot of people migrate towards one product in particular in the market and they never really try the other APM vendors. They'll look at the page and they'll look at the price, but sometimes you just have to pay a little more. Importantly, it's the features that you get that make it worth it. I won't name the new products, the ones people migrate towards a lot - especially developers, it seems like that cohort instantly likes them - but AppDynamics and a couple of the other ones as well are really good for production. AppDynamics, in particular, excels on that. Don't just install AppDynamics, install a couple of them. Pick four or five and run them in production, pick a couple nodes even, and compare the interfaces and the ability to use the interfaces. Most people will quickly find that there is a real difference between them. Some people will gravitate, still, towards certain products rather than others, but I haven't seen a person yet, who has not loved the AppDynamics features and portal and how it does things.

You can't just look at the feature list, spend five minutes on their web page, and then dismiss it. You have to run it on your app, see how easy it is and how much time it saves you.

I have not used the marketplace version. I've used the traditional, agent-based licensing. The reason for that is partly to do with the affordability. I can take the same license for the on-prem and put it on AWS as well. We always use the same license, because we don't know where it's going to end up.

In terms of integrating AppDynamics with other products within our AWS environment, the way to describe that is that we're using it to watch certain services. Obviously, if our database is using endpoints within AWS, which a majority of the apps are, such as Redis or RDS nodes, AppDynamics has seen those. All of the integrations that I can think of, except for the database, are web-based. We see the database integration and we see all the web-based integration. So we have integrated with other products.

We haven't seen a case where we haven't been able to see the interaction between our app and the service. Just to be clear, I have seen other APM products that miss those integrations. You plug them in and you don't see your SNS calls. Usually, it's solvable, but you've got to troubleshoot and set up some special code and it becomes painful. I can't think of a case in AppDynamics where we just didn't plug it in and start seeing those calls right away.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. I've been using it for so long, and have used so many other APM vendors, and it really is the most stable one. It works with the most conditions that we encounter. The only reason I take off one point is the cost. I can't give it a ten because it is not a cheap product. None of them are. The price is fair, but I could use it on more projects if they had a lower price.

Part of it is the ease of adoption. We were a big CA house beforehand. We had a massive implementation of CA APM, but nobody uses it. We ditched CA in favor of AppDynamics. We compared New Relic and AppDynamics. AppDynamics is, in my opinion, far superior.

The ease of adoption has already picked up in my company. Bear in mind, we're probably about nine months into the project; it's probably more widely used than CA was after three years. So, that is, for me, the prime benefit. We are actually getting people to use the tool and get value out of it; it's not just shelf ware.

As any APM tool should, it provides root cause analysis. It enables you to reduce your mean time to resolution. It enables you to identify performance bottlenecks, even in pre-production environments. It generally helps provide better applications, better code, to customers; things we weren't really getting out of CA. The 2 or 3 teams who were using it got some of that value, but the rest of the organization just didn't. Now, we've got teams who had never picked up an APM product already getting value out of it, literally in a matter of days after installation.

I think it's because of the ease of use. It provides useful information straight away, quite deliberately so. It's much easier to navigate, it's much easier to understand the data that's being returned to you, and I think that really helped teams and individuals not be afraid of it.

Part of it is support for more modern languages. Node is lagging behind. And I think clarity on exactly where they intend to go, as well, because the relationship with other vendors like Splunk is a little bit grey at the moment. I'm curious as to where they're going with that and whether they intend to work as partners with them, or actually impose on their space.

To get a higher rating, they'd have to fix the Node issues, they'd have to fix some framework issues; it doesn’t work very well with Vertex 3, for instance. Tweaks like that. In any case, nothing's ever perfect.

We haven’t really had any stability or scalability issues. We're using the SaaS offering rather than on-premise, which obviously takes away a lot of that headache. The SaaS operations team are pretty good. The SaaS Operations team isn't somebody you directly interact with, but through the account management team and through the support teams.

I’m very happy with the technical support. There have been a couple of incidents – there are always a couple of incidents – but actually they've been very responsive, they've been very easy to work with, and happy to take feedback, both positive and negative.

I did the original CA APM installation four years ago; and then was involved in the RFP process, the initial commercial negotiations with AppD, and therefore the initial set up, as well, for the first few applications.

AppDynamics initial setup was very easy. There are some niggles. Some of the modern languages are less easy to use. Node is a bit of a sticking point with us at the moment, but installing it on a JVM, for instance, is absolutely a piece of cake.

As I’ve mentioned, we've looked at New Relic. Previously, a few years ago, we looked at Dynatrace. We've had a relationship with CA for 10 years, something like that.

We definitely wanted to move away from the CA legacy. Of the three main tools that are modern and out there for APM, you’ve got New Relic, Dynatrace and AppDynamics. Dynatrace isn't really in the same space, in my opinion; that's much more pre-production, code-level stuff. Between New Relic and AppDynamics, it was quite close. There are still teams in my organization who prefer New Relic, but as a whole solution, as a whole suite, I think AppDynamics gives you more flexibility, more in-depth visibility, and I think it has a brighter future.

Think about what it is you're doing beforehand. Plan it a little bit. One of the slightly strange problems that some of the early teams ran into was fundamentally misunderstanding the application tier and node hierarchy in AppDynamics. You ended up with some very strangely named applications. Read that one paragraph on each of those. Work out what it is you're doing, and then it all springs to life. Also, talk to other teams who've done it.

We also use AppDynamics database monitoring. We use the machine agents. I think that's pretty much everything we've got. I’m generally happy with them. Every tool has its limitations and you want more.

We use the solution to monitor transactions and to keep track of, like, data analytics.

I like that AppDynamics allows every organization to have what they want to see, like for my organization, we're able to customize the dashboard to show us details of what we want to see in our transactions. So, it shows us the transactions that are coming in, outgoing transactions, and field transactions. So, we had the freedom to customize, and I think that was priceless.

Regarding Search Guard functionality, there is room for improvement. Also, I think it was pretty good for the area I used.

I have experience with AppDynamics.

I rate the solution's stability as a ten out of ten because it is a very stable platform.

It was scalable on other platforms where we needed to buy licenses because we simply had to customize it again to accommodate whatever we were adding. We didn't use it much since many users weren't using it. It was just for the IT and executive personnel who wanted to view the dashboard. Yeah. So, it was quite easy. Up to 200 users were using the solution.

The initial setup was quite easy because we were given an option or leverage to ask AppDynamics to send staff members over for training. After that training, they were able to come back and deploy the solution for us. So, the process was quite easy, and they were also offering support. For deployment, we prefer to deploy it on-premises. So, we have it in our DR and production environment. The deployment process didn't take long since it was done by AppDynamics' team, which is quite a big institution.

We did the implementation ourselves, but we had their support virtually.

I have experienced an ROI using the solution. So, AppDynamics provides us with details to have a live view of our transactions, especially whenever we're having failures, during which we have a live view of it provided by the monitoring guys. We link it to our MySQL so we can query what transactions are failing or what error they are getting. So we know what the customers are facing from the comfort of our offices. The solution was worth the money.

There were no added costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Since it is an excellent application, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. I would suggest others use the products and just make sure that they get in touch with the administrator of AppDynamics so that they can devote their time and energy to learning about it so that they can at least administer the platform properly.

Our use case depends on whether the client has revenue on their primary revenue-generating websites. For example, we previously implemented for Aviva Financial, and their primary revenue-generating website was their Aviva website. They primarily do home, medical, motor, and car insurance and use this solution to download insurance quotes. This solution is also used to monitor the end-user activity, website speed, product details and quotes.

We use the solution for end-user performance monitoring to monitor customers' browsers, like Chrome, Safari and Internet Explorer. So we're able to get details, and each transaction gets monitored, and the information gets captured and presented to management.

The management observes the end-user activity, which helps get quotes signed and monitor the payment system gateways.

It has a lot of features, and it provides a lot of data, so it helps businesses identify their user base, business parameters and key business metrics.

The solution is very scalable, and you can get the performance data from the end users. So it provides a proper way to analyze data from different regions. Most of the users download the data, which helps them understand the business strengths and monitor traffic from each region and maximum users.

A problem with App Dynamics is that they do not have robust documentation, making it difficult for start-up organizations who may need guidance. In addition, their documentation is complex and not easy to understand.

Another problem with AppDynamics is the agents of division. There is no central distribution system to update all the endpoints, so we need patch mechanism updates to do those activities. It is cumbersome, and it's not easy, so they lag in that area.

We have been using this solution for the past six months. It's a SaaS product only, and AppDynamics is according to the agent version. It is on cloud.

The initial setup was very easy. Deployment depends on how many applications you need to monitor. Initial data collection can take up to two to three weeks. Then, like any end-user application, it will be implemented in a test environment. Once the test environment is a success, it moves to production, which takes one to two months.

The support and management team primarily have access to the data, and we collect the story at the back end. For example, we do this for Aviva, which has an approximately 300,000 user base. So the information on whoever visits Aviva's website is passed on to AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring.

They have licenses. Technically, AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is a Cisco product. When using this application, we need to install the agents on each server, and there is a transaction cost. End-user monitoring requires purchasing millions of transaction licenses, but infrastructure monitoring costs are based on the agent. So everything is licensed, and it's a costly solution.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. We decided to use this solution because they are market leaders. Appdynamics and Dynatrace are the main application performance monitoring solutions and have been for the last five to six years.

I would recommend this solution. First, you need to analyze multiple tools in the market based on your requirements. For example, if you need an enterprise monitoring system, go for AppDynamics or Dynatrace, but if you have fewer applications, you can choose other end-user monitoring solutions like Site24x7.

We use this product for the public sector and for really big data centers and infrastructure.

We implemented it for a big bank in Morocco and it monitors all the web interface interfaces. It also monitors solutions like Salesforce, SAP, these kinds of solutions, and it describes the problem really from the root.

You can use one module for each server, for each application, and for each API.

It can monitor the income and the outcome. For example, when you have a website that has online payments, if there are bugs in the online payment for the provider, it will check it, see the problem, and send you an alert.

If the development team makes a mistake with this tool, it points really the mistake and sends it to the manager and it provides also a solution too, as it monitors the code. It provides solutions to make the code more effective.

The initial setup is simple. 

With the solution you can put add-ons on it and it's very customizable. You can customize it easily. If you want something that the tool doesn't have, you can add it easily.

It is stable.

The solution can scale. 

Compared to Dynatrace, which is the biggest competitor to AppDynamics, Dynatrace is a one-agent tool. You don't have to put an agent in every single server or app. However, the monitoring is less effective in Dynatrace. If AppDynamics could do a one-agent function with their actual monitoring effectiveness, it will be the greatest tool.

I've been dealing with the solution for two years now. 

The solution is stable. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product is scalable. 30% of our team uses the solution. They are IT experts and they are DevOps. You have to know how to code and you have to know how to deal with infrastructure servers, et cetera, and you have to know how to put KPIs and everything that the client needs into place.

I'm not sure if clients have any plans to increase usage at this time. 

Technical support is very, very good. 

I'm also familiar with Dynatrace.

The implementation is straightforward. There may be a bit of complexity here and there. You just have to buy the license with the number of agents that you want to install. It's more complex than the Dynatrace setup. It's complex in terms of the fact that you have to know the tool and you have to know how to code. If you want to customize it, you have to know development also, those parts can be very complex, or more complex than Dynatrace, for example.

The deployment takes from one to six months. 

The implementation strategy is, first, we take notice of the entire IT infrastructure, the entire digital environment. When the audit is complete, then we proceed to the tool installation.

We have ten people that can handle deployment and maintenance tasks. 

Most of the implementation was handled in-house. We have a delivery center in Tunisia that can handle the setup. We provide assistance to our clients. 

Clients have seen an ROI. For example, we had a client who had to troubleshoot a website and its banking application, and it was buggy all the time. It was not working. I was a client of this bank. Since we implemented this solution, it's been one of the best banking apps in Morocco.

They had great ROI in terms of client satisfaction. For the user, the banking administration processes are easier. You do everything on the app, which now works well.

The return on investment is huge.

The licensing is paid yearly. It depends on the size of the environment, and the number of apps or IT infrastructure that is monitored. It can cost from $30,000 to $500,000. Larger companies, like, for example, Facebook or Amazon, would likely one million dollars. It really depends on the size of the company.

There are some add-ons to put back robots that make tests on the website on something, to see if there is some risk, bugs, or whatever could damage the website.

We didn't evaluate other options.

We're resellers. 

We deal with various versions of the product. The on-premises deployment we had we stopped using a few months ago. Now, we only deal with SaaS deployments. 

In this digital era, this tool is not nice to have, it's a must have. If a company works 100% on digital and they have websites to make SaaS solutions, everything which is on internet can be hacked, can have bugs, et cetera. This tool is really the tool that you must have to prevent this type of risk.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We are using the solution to improve the performance of our application transactions.

This solution is easy to use and very powerful, it is a complete tool for us.

There could be some improvement in the constructions of the diagrams, it is too difficult currently.

I have been using the solution for four months.

We have used in the past Wily and Dyatrace. We switched to this solution because of economics and we have found there is more information available to help us improve.

The installation was simple.

We used a partner to help us do the implementation of the solution. The full deployment was approximately one week and we use a three-person technical team for maintenance.

There is a license for the solution and we paid approximately $2,000. There is also an additional cost above the standard license which cost us approximately $3,000.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate AppDynamics a nine out of ten.

Monitor 1000's of .NET, Java, Node.js, and Go applications using an auto-discovering agent-based tool.

We have cut our MTTR by half just by deploying agents. It significantly reduced the amount of time that we spend building synthetic monitors. To the point, we rarely have to build any monitors unless it is a vendor app or appliance we can't access to install an agent on.  

• Autodiscovery of application topology, based on real user traffic
• Baselining of every single metric that you throw at it.
• Easy to use API
• Customizable extensions
• Facilitates business, dev and ops communication
• Agents have low CPU overhead compared to other agent-based products we have tried.

The GUI can be overwhelming at first to a novice Dev or Ops support person, and the possible root causes of an issue do not bubble up to the first screen you see.  We usually walk everyone through a few simple steps: 

1. Click here to see errors and exceptions.
2. Click here to see what is causing response time problems.
3. Click here to view the timeframe of a past issue.
4. Click here to drill down into the root cause at the method level snapshot.   

Very rarely. Solid performance on our controllers.

None. The SaaS team worked with us on our rollout and expansion, making sure our controller is tuned for the metric and event loads.

• Great SaaS support, performance and uptime
• Responsive support team
• Responsive extension Dev team

The previous tool was:

• Clunky
• Had difficulty in configuring alerting.
• Did not use baselines.
• Required hard thresholds for each metric.
• Had a Java-based GUI, performed poorly.
• Nobody wanted to use it.

There is currently no automated agent management/upgrades for every agent type (currently the Universal Agent supports Java, expanding to .NET and machine agents in the future). So, if you do not have a solid automation tool already in use, deploying agents can be time consuming.   

We had an in-house team of two people, and a vendor team assisting. The team was a mix of beginner to expert, and it worked out great.

Dynatrace and HPE Diagnostics.

RUM, synthetics, mobile, network, and browser analytics make this a well-rounded tool.