Splunk AppDynamics Reviews

Application Analytics is mainly used to get full visibility into the SAP stack in order to detect performance problems.

Application Analytics reduces the average time it takes to repair performance problems and improves cooperation between different IT departments.

Application Analytics' most valuable features are the real-user monitoring and the agents installed in the software stack on the application server.

Application Analytics' performance in pure and native cloud environments could be improved. It could also be more intuitive to use, especially regarding business IQ functionality, and the dashboard programming needs some manual intrusion. In the next release, I would like to see better integration with OpenTelemetry.

I've been working with Application Analytics for three years. 

Application Analytics is really stable.

Application Analytics is scalable.

AppDynamics' technical support is okay, though there's quite a lot of self-service.

The initial setup was pretty straightforward and took a couple of days, though installing the SAP agent takes a little longer in SAP environments.

We used an in-house team and an AppDynamics team.

The license fee for Application Analytics is in the range of 2.5 million over three years, with extra fees for service contingencies.

I would recommend Application Analytics to others as a professional tool and rate it eight out of ten.

I primarily use AppDynamics for application performance monitoring.

AppDynamics provides visibility on slowness or problems in production and processes in revenue-related products or software, as well as generating performance and availability metrics. This enables understanding of users' end-to-end experience and provides information on user behavior.

AppDynamics' most valuable feature is Business iQ, which is based on analytics.

The Log Analytics feature is a bit complicated. There are also some bugs in the solution that need to be fixed.

I've been using AppDynamics for five to six years.

AppDynamics is stable and reliable.

AppDynamics's technical support is great.

Previously, I used Micro Focus OpsBridge but switched as it wasn't keeping up with the latest market trends in monitoring.

The initial setup for the SaaS solution requires little to no effort, but the on-prem version is more complex

AppDynamics is one of the most expensive solutions on the market. The typical licensing fee for a small customer would be $500k plus, with additional fees for professional services. The price also varies depending on whether the customer goes for the on-prem or SaaS solution, with the on-prem version potentially extremely expensive because of the hardware requirements.

We evaluated Moogsoft and Dynatrace.

I would rate AppDynamics nine out of ten.

I primarily use AppDynamics for my servers.

AppDynamics' best feature is automation - for example, when I add a note, it can understand the data automatically.

AppDynamics' modules and hardware resources are very high.

I've been using AppDynamics for a year.

AppDynamics is stable and reliable.

AppDynamics' scalability is good.

I didn't have a good experience with AppDynamics' technical support. Its knowledge base is locked up and unavailable.

I also work with Zabbix, which has better education and hardware specification, though AppDynamics is more user-friendly.

The initial setup was complex because we had to configure every agent and module, use a specific server for every module, and manage every visual and virtual machine.

I used an outsourced company.

AppDynamics is really pricey as it requires licenses for every feature.

AppDynamics forces you to depend on the company to do what you want, which may be a negative if you prefer to work independently. I would rate AppDynamics as seven out of ten.

I mainly use AppDynamics to detect issues and bugs and monitor our enterprise database module.

AppDynamics' most valuable features are the response time of the business transaction modules, the ability to monitor multiple services, and testing and developing environments.

AppDynamics's agent management could be improved. They could also manage their licenses by host count rather than CPU core counts and on independent container count instead of for five containers. In the next release, AppDynamics should include AI modules in the on-prem environment.

I've been using AppDynamics for five years.

AppDynamics is stable.

Generally, the initial setup is easy, but it's harder for Java applications because you have to do some manual customization in agent configuration. Deployment took around a month.

We used a partner team.

AppDynamics' licensing scheme is confusing because all of its domains require different licenses. AppDynamics is priced on the higher side. 

I would recommend AppDynamics to other users and would rate it eight out of ten.

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.

I work with a global bank that operates across Asia, the United States, and Europe. It's a few thousand people. We primarily use AppDynamics for Kubernetes, web applications, middleware APIs, Java, etc. In terms of technology, it's either Java Spring Boot or some of the API calls, and some of the use cases include continuously checking API availability. 

Some use cases are related to front-end tuning or the user experience across the globe. The applications are used across America, Europe, and some parts of Asia. It's a global system, and user experience is what we wanted to measure. AppDynamics is SaaS. I've never used an on-prem version. The controllers are mostly on AWS, while the agents are deployed on-premises.

Transition tracing is the most valuable is pretty easy and useful, but the user experience piece is also good. 

The Kubernetes cluster agent has not yet matured. That's one area that requires a lot of improvement. You have two options for implementing the Kubernetes agent. One is deployed in DocCloud, but you can't download those images from DocCloud for security reasons at most organizations, so this option isn't that useful.

The installation for the second option isn't that user-friendly. Transition tracing for the Kubernetes application is challenging. You have to navigate to a new set of user interfaces in AppDynamics, so that's the pain point. There is an icon you need to click on to get a newer user interface.

I've been using AppDynamics for almost five years. 

AppDynamics scaled well up to around 3,000 agents. The performance deteriorated after that, while Dynatrace could support more than 10,000 agents. We were surprised that AppDynamics' scalability is not so good.

I had a good experience with tech support. When we raised a ticket with AppDynamics, we usually got a response within a few hours. If we set up a call, their engineers will get on the phone with us. That was also reasonably good. 

Setting up AppDynamics is relatively straightforward except for the Kubernetes part. It was all easy for the Kubernetes cluster agent part. We implemented thousands of agents using Ansible, so it was automated. It was about 15 to 20 minutes in terms of pipeline and restarting because a lot of the scripting and automation were already done. 

The AppDynamics license is divided. It isn't one all-inclusive license. Dynatrace has one agent, but AppDynamics has different sets of licenses. You need to define your use case and what you want to monitor. That is something you need to be clear about. Once you know your use case clearly, take time to figure out your target state metric, and go for AppDynamics. 

I rate AppDynamics seven out of 10. In the modern world, Dynatrace is moving toward helping the companies in the current landscape, but AppDynamics is a second-generation company. It needs to adopt more of a lifecycle perspective rather than limiting itself to triage, tracing, etc.

We use this solution to monitor the response time in CPU and usage and for URL monitoring.

I find troubleshooting is quicker because we can drill down into the end points and see which endpoints are getting critical. Visibility-wise, the micro details are easy to find. 

I have been using this solution for four years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

Support for this solution is good but communication could be improved.

I have previously used SolarWinds. Compared to that, I find AppDynamics better.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

This solution is expensive.

Because AppDynamics sells this as end-to-end visibility, there are no use cases in the databases. Use case applied to AppDynamics Brower Real-User Monitoring can be applied here as well. If the user experiences latency on its request, it's most likely because the database is effectively queuing the request. The same scenarios can apply.

The performance of AppDynamics Database Monitoring is good, I have not had any complaints.

AppDynamics Database Monitoring is straightforward, there is not a lot to it, it either monitors or it doesn't.

One of the key features that are missing is the ability to manage users centrally, which is a real pain when it does not happen. That is a feature that their main competitor has had for quite some time. I'm surprised they don't have it already.

I believe they need to increase their level of visibility in the infrastructure, particularly in the infrastructure monitoring section, which currently lacks visibility.

The license model is a bit complex. They should make it a little bit easier, which I believe they will do in the next quarter, or in the next two quarters. I also dislike it because it is based on CPU, which will increase the cost of deployment and licensing. They currently have a complex model and charge on a per-node basis. They plan to change this in the future to make it less complicated, but it will be more expensive because it will be done on a CPU basis rather than a node basis. And this is not good. I deducted one point for that.

We have been providing AppDynamics Database Monitoring for six years.

It is deployed both on the cloud, and on-premises.

The stability of AppDynamics Database Monitoring is fine.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The time it takes to deploy an agent varies depending on the customer and the application, but it can take up to 15 minutes.

The licensing scheme is very complex. They need to make it easier.

AppDynamics is a good tool that offers excellent out-of-the-box dashboards and application topology. Even for their competitors, their current technology is unrivaled in these two areas. 

I would rate AppDynamics Database Monitoring an eight out of ten.

I am not a user, I am an implementer.

For EUC, one of the use cases would be to monitor online shopping from retail, for example, to understand the client's journey and if they are experiencing any difficulties in, at the very least, making their purchase or browsing, the front-end of a specific customer's online shopping.

The second would be internal applications to determine whether the application is living in an order that allows it to process its workloads. It's quite generic because we have so many different types of applications.

With Real-User Monitoring, the most valuable features are what I have described. We can see the customer's path from their computer to the backend systems. It gives us full visibility end-to-end, and if there are any issues, we can observe and record them to improve application performance quality. In addition to the EUC, you can add synthetic transactions, where you can see from every point if your application is performing adequately in terms of reachability if you are running a global site.

As AppDynamics partners, we are fully aware of the roadmap, but I would like them to enhance their SAP monitoring.

One of the features that I would like to see is centralized agent management in the platform console.

While I am not expecting it in the next release, I would want more centralized management of the agent in the platform and better support.

I've been working with AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring for six years. Since the existence of AppDynamics.

It is deployed both on the cloud and on-premises.

We don't have a specific version, we have several instances. I work for an MSP, and we offer these services to a large number of customers.

We have clients using the latest versions, as well as clients using older versions.

AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring is stable if it's quick. Depending on where the application is hosted, for example, the same time it takes someone in Singapore to access an application is unlikely to be the same time it takes someone in the UK to access it.

Scalability is also important. That is not directly related to end-user monitoring, but it will be one of the business cases involving the use of microservices and the dynamic expansion of a solution.

In terms of technical support, they don't need to be faster, but they could be more usable. I believe they can contribute more than robots because they do not always adhere to the same standards. They can be a little more helpful, and I'm speaking broadly because they have good guys in there, but we don't always get the good guys, the good resources. To be honest, I can't say I have any complaints.

I am familiar with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, New Relic, and Datadog, which are the four main ones that we currently use.

When it comes to AppDynamics, we use all of it, all the stack.

The setup is straightforward. I don't see an issue if it's on-premises, but if it's SaaS, we don't install anything other than the agent.

AppDynamics does not usually do monthly payments. They do it on an annual basis, at the very least.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using this solution.

I would rate AppDynamics Browser Real-User Monitoring a seven out of ten.

We use this solution to monitor our core application's performance, to know what transaction is running an error on transactions in these applications. We are based in Egypt and are customers of AppDynamics. I'm the deputy general manager of the company. 

The solution provides good overall application performance and transaction errors which reflect backend health. It's a user-friendly product and very powerful. It offers good performance and features. 

AppDynamics is very expensive, if it were a little cheaper it would be more attractive to clients. The company has decided not to add any new features to the on-prem version which affects our monitoring work. Because of the nature of our business, we can only deploy the solution on-prem and so we're now at a disadvantage.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable.

Customer support has a local presence in Egypt. They are very responsive and provide a good service. 

I prefer AppDynamics to the CA or Broadcom applications which I've previously used. AppDynamics is very easy to use whereas ABM was quite difficult. When it comes to technical data collection, they're both very good. Maybe CA ABM can collect more data, but when it comes to the presentation layer and ease of use, AppDynamics is much better. 

The initial setup is easy. 

Licensing is by subscription and AppDynamics is expensive but I believe its main competitors such as Dynatrace, are also expensive.

I recommend this product but am a little concerned for the future given that they are no longer adding new features to the on-prem version. For now, they're supporting the on-prem version and they're releasing security batches, but no new features. It might be worth waiting to see what they decide, it could be that they will move to a cloud-only version. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10.