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

OmniPeek vs OpenText SiteScope comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 24, 2024
 

Categories and Ranking

OmniPeek
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
44th
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
6
Ranking in other categories
Network Monitoring Software (49th)
OpenText SiteScope
Ranking in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability
41st
Average Rating
7.6
Reviews Sentiment
7.6
Number of Reviews
24
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability category, the mindshare of OmniPeek 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

Venkat Lkmula - PeerSpot reviewer
Easy to identify packets, beneficial color assigning, and responsive support
I have previously used Wireshark. One of the differences between OmniPeek and Wireshark is in the test bed OmniPeek allows you to choose a color coding for each and every component. You can set the color of many components, such as the client based on your interest, and MAC address. You are able to see certain packets from the APs easier. Wireshark is more user-friendly for automation and OmniPeek is good for manual testing. Wireshark cannot be run continuously because the buffers will be used up after half an hour and the application crash. However, in OmniPeek this does not happen it continuously starts until the memory space is consumed. It will not crash. You can run it for twelve hours continuously and it will save without crashing.
Christopher M Cook - PeerSpot reviewer
Doesn't require much custom coding and can run on different platforms, but the types of scripting files you can execute on it are limited
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.

Quotes from Members

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

Pros

"The most valuable feature is OmniPeek is user-friendly."
"I believe the most crucial feature of OmniPeek search is the ability to sniff packets based on channel switching."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek was the ability it gave us to see the connection procedure."
"It's a solid piece of software. It's stable."
"The most valuable feature of OmniPeek is the ability to assign custom color codes to the different packets easily."
"The most valuable features are the voice bot, which checks the quality of service for voice, and the expert view that gives me insight on what and where to troubleshoot."
"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."
"There's no agent you need installed on the servers. In our environment, we have some servers out of our control so we cannot manage them. We use SiteScope to monitor the availability, the resources on the servers, etc. This allows us to do this job without installing agents so there's no need to take care of anything on the server."
"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."
"It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates."
"The Monitor Templates functionality allowed us to spin up monitoring with .csv files pretty easily."
"The most valuable feature of OpenText SiteScope is that it is easy to manage and user-friendly."
"The product's ability to monitor systems and applications and send alerts and create support tickets are the most valuable features of the product."
"Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours."
 

Cons

"Making it more clear on how to configure the filters, or really automating them, would be an improvement."
"I am not using OmniPeek for automation, we only do manual testing. Automation testing is tedious to do. The automation should be more user-friendly. I have exposed some APIs but the usage is not user-friendly."
"The solution's automation has room for improvement."
"I would like to see the tool work in an open environment the same as how it does in a closed environment."
"I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software."
"I would like to see the saving feature improved. We have had issues if you do not save your progress then you have to start from the beginning."
"It should improve its integrations with various tools, especially service management tools."
"It may lack some features other products in the category have like more detailed transaction tracking."
"More out of the box Cloud integration and capabilities."
"The tool needs to support new technologies like Kubernetes. It also needs to improve scalability."
"It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository."
"They should provide more templates for new vendor devices."
"The lack of an agent means that remote monitoring requires multiple firewall ports to be opened."
"I would be very interested in having transaction traceability included in the product, to give us a better view of what is really going wrong in a particular method and action."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"We have only purchased the add-on once and have not paid for any subsequent versions as it was too costly for us."
"There are different types of licenses available."
"The pricing for this solution could be improved, as it is a very expensive product."
"Licensing is a little steep."
"SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing."
"Depending on your requirements, there are two licensing models available. A simple point model, or an endpoint model."
"You have to pay for their "solution templates". Other tools do not charge you for knowledge-based monitoring bundles."
"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."
"I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive."
"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."
"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."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
13%
University
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Financial Services Firm
32%
Manufacturing Company
17%
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
No data available
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about OmniPeek?
It's a solid piece of software. It's stable.
What needs improvement with OmniPeek?
There's likely not a future for OmniPeek in LiveAction. LiveAction acquired OmniPeek. I don't see a clear roadmap in the future for improving this software. It's a bit expensive. The product has al...
What is your primary use case for OmniPeek?
Our company is an ODM manufacturer for wireless products like routers and WiFi access points. As an RD and QA department, we are sniffing the packet from the air to capture the raw WiFi traffic fro...
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?
I would rate the pricing of SiteScope as a five out of ten in terms of costliness. It is not overly expensive, but there is room for improvement in terms of cost-effectiveness in some areas.
What needs improvement with Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope?
In terms of improvement, OpenText SiteScop could become a better solution by adding more monitoring templates, like RedScope, to make it easier to track specific technologies. It should also improv...
 

Also Known As

Savvius OmniPeek
Micro Focus SiteScope, HPE SiteScope, SiteScope
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Apcon, Aruba Networks, Avaya Inc., Cisco Systems, Ekahau, Gigamon Systems, HP, IBM, IXIA, Meru Networks, Napatech, NextComputing, Procera Networks, Qualcomm Atheros, Ralink Technology Corporation, Telchemy
Vodafone Ireland, Kuveyt Turk Participation Bank
Find out what your peers are saying about OmniPeek vs. OpenText SiteScope and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.