Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

AWS Auto Scaling vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

AWS Auto Scaling
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
13th
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.0
Number of Reviews
21
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
24th
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.9
Number of Reviews
25
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of January 2025, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of AWS Auto Scaling is 0.1%, up from 0.1% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of OpenText SiteScope is 0.6%, up from 0.5% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
 

Featured Reviews

Mbula Mboma - PeerSpot reviewer
Boosts deployment efficiency with seamless automatic scaling capabilities
My primary use case for Auto Scaling is mainly to deploy applications at scale Auto Scaling has made the deployment of applications more efficient, allowing us to manage traffic and maintain performance as user counts increase. Auto Scaling is a cool feature that works well and its automatic…
Ahmed Salman - PeerSpot reviewer
Instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence
The system is really powerful; instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence. It allows me to create scripts and automate several processes, making tasks simpler and more efficient. By using templates for systems or databases, I can monitor various needs easily, which saves time and increases productivity.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The solution helps optimize the cost of the AWS environment."
"The health check integration feature ensures that the instances are healthy and capable of absorbing traffic, thus serving their purpose effectively."
"It efficiently handles traffic, ensuring we are not running expenses and the infrastructure is strong enough to handle the load."
"The good thing about Autoscaling is that it provides the capacity to minimize downtime. So, it gives you the assurance of stability and robustness within your system."
"The setup is not very complex."
"AWS Auto Scaling is cost-effective and very useful for businesses."
"The tool gives you the flexibility to scale up and grow. The solution is also fast to deploy."
"It can scale."
"The system is really powerful; instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence."
"It's a very flexible product so you can run a script out of it, even straight out of the box."
"The URL monitoring is excellent."
"The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring."
"It's easy to template standard monitoring configurations, and automate monitoring configuration."
"Instead of executing jobs multiple times, I can configure it once, schedule, and apply it on multiple servers in sequence. It allows me to create scripts and automate several processes, making tasks simpler and more efficient."
"Simple deployment: The deployment uses protocols such as NetBios, SSH, WMI, SNMP, which means that any device with any of these protocols will be monitored."
"Our experiences with Micro Focus SiteScope have been mostly positive as we can easily work with multiple monitors and different types of monitors pretty quickly. There are a lot of out-of-the-box solutions for us through Micro Focus SiteScope, so we don't have to do that much custom coding for the vast majority of requests that we get for monitoring. There are some limitations that we've run into and some problems every once in a while, but they've been relatively minor."
 

Cons

"The product could add more features for managing instances."
"Setting up the configuration involves too much work for the cloud engineer, like configuring the ALB, the target group, and all the steps."
"Flexibility in configuring the workload is missing in AWS Auto Scaling."
"The product’s pricing needs improvement."
"It could be cheaper."
"In comparison to other public clouds, the product is costly."
"It has latency issues. It depends on the distribution used, whether it's Amazon Linux, Windows Linux, etc. Occasionally, there are latency issues, which might lead to slower performance."
"The only area of improvement is the speed at which servers are launched. When cleaning up to six servers at a time, it can take up to 15 to 20 minutes to launch new servers."
"Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"Direct integration with an SMS gateway for sending critical alerts to the support SME. This will help customer investing in third party middleware solutions for SMS."
"Full application functionality available via the API. There are some functions you can perform managing monitors, that are only available through the UI."
"The graphs and dashboard in the solution are areas that need improvement."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues."
"In terms of issues with Micro Focus SiteScope, some that we've run into were unintended, for example, extra executions of monitors and some false alerts when there were problems connecting to endpoints or there were issues with the application that sometimes resulted in false positives. We had a few issues with the way time zones were configured when the system time differed from the time indicated during the monitoring, but those were just little things that weren't too bad. As far as the limitations of Micro Focus SiteScope, the types of scripting files that can be executed are rather limited unless you go to some third-party plugins. These are the areas for improvement in the solution."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The product has moderate pricing."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a cheap solution."
"AWS Auto Scaling's price is high."
"AWS Auto Scaling is a pay-per-use and pay-as-you-use service."
"The product is expensive."
"The pricing is good. I have not had any customers that have complained about the price."
"AWS Auto Scaling is an expensive solution."
"When Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope has introduced approximately eight years ago and there was not very much competition making the price high. However, when comparing the price of Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope now to other tools, they should reduce the price. It is similar to a legacy tool at this point."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"The product's pricing should be lower since there are many open-source products that can do the same job with better user interfaces. The tool's pricing is yearly and you need to pay for support."
"The pricing or licensing cost for Micro Focus SiteScope is often bundled with other things, so the cost for each individual would be difficult to calculate. Pricing could be $2,000,000 a year. My company pays for technical support because it's part of the contract with Micro Focus SiteScope. You buy the licenses, but you're also paying for the support. With Nagios, it's much more bare-bones as far as paying for licenses and the software itself, and my company didn't have to use as much Nagios support yet in one or two years because there weren't too many problems using Nagios, and it's much more cost-effective, so that's one of the reasons why my company is migrating to Nagios from Micro Focus SiteScope."
"It is expensive. I don't like its licensing. I don't like anything where you have to license it by individual licenses. I'm not a fan of that, but that's just me."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Financial Services Firm
32%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
10%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about AWS Auto Scaling?
The tool's most valuable feature is vertical auto-scaling, which is easy to use. However, most companies now prefer horizontal scaling. I set up the health check integration to monitor CPU usage. W...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS Auto Scaling?
The pricing of Auto Scaling is medium range, neither high nor low.
What needs improvement with AWS Auto Scaling?
It is sometimes very critical to deploy on AWS since some servers are already running in the background. There are challenges for employees on how to deploy at a given time. It requires a downtime ...
What do you like most about Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The most valuable feature of SiteScope is its infrastructure monitoring.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
The licensing scheme for Micro Focus tools is reasonable, and more affordable. It's seen as medium or de-receivable.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
While working with OpenText, I noticed sometimes teams refuse intervention due to compliance issues. Overcoming control restrictions for different applications could be improved.
 

Comparisons

No data available
 

Also Known As

AWS Auto-Scaling
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Expedia, Intuit, Royal Dutch Shell, Brooks Brothers
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about AWS Auto Scaling vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.