OpenText SiteScope Reviews

Simplest tool for monitoring servers, web content, databases and other hardware. Its dashboard is really good.

• Complexity in template editing 
• They should provide more templates for new vendor devices.

Very stable.

No issues with the tools.

It fully depends on the costs, customer, and architect.

It was straightforward.

It depends on what the customer wants.

Before choosing a product, I want to evaluate to check all the requirements. Then, before implementation, check all the customer requirements accordingly. 

It's a monitoring tool that's deeply integrated with Performance Center. We can put a load on it and see all the information we need. Plus, it's an inexpensive solution.

It's integrated with different monitoring tools, such as AppDynamics. When we perform testing, it gives us a single client for selecting which monitoring data we want for later analysis of the performance of our systems.

We'd like a uniform interface for monitoring our system, since that's the purpose of SiteScope. I think this would make it a true monitoring tool for the environment.

It just works.

We're able to scale when necessary.

We have not used tech support.

We'll probably remove SiteScope shortly because we've been using another monitoring tool in production. SiteScope is just not something we use very much of any more.

• Proactive monitoring based on real experience
• Configuring thresholds for warning events for proactive monitoring and actioning

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.

Great monitoring capabilities:  The monitoring capabilities have no limit; whatever you can imagine, you can monitor, even using URL monitors, database query monitors, and formula composite monitors, which are not common in other tools.

Reporting:  You have a lot of reports using different criteria - for example, dates, filters, events, and status - which let you analyze the monitored data, convert it into information and take actions.

Event-based actions: You can simply send an e-mail or take actions like restart the server, restart the service, etc.

Agentless Monitoring

Dynamic Monitoring

Dockers Monitoring

Dependency Configuration

Even though the log system is reliable, the tool must have a database. It could be more reliable using a database repository instead of a log repository. It could even improve performance and the ability for generating cross-domain reporting for better governance.

It has a wide variety of preconfigured monitors, and great capability for monitoring whatever you wish, including configuring formulas for monitoring.

It is an agentless tool, and very easy to implement. For better performance, try to use another disk different than the OS.

Configure HP SiteScope Restart option for releasing HW resources.

Use of Regular Expressions (regex) is a valuable feature

Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope could improve by adding more features, such as cloud, APM, and DevOps monitoring.

I have used Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope within the last 12 months.

The stability of the Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is good.

Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is a scalable solution. 

We have approximately 35 people using it.

The initial implementation of Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope is easy. The process can take approximately 30 minutes with one person.

I have found the solution simple to maintain, it can be done with some person.

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.

I rate Micro Focus Voltage SiteScope five out of ten.

We use SiteScope for monitoring of our production systems, system resources, and also some application monitoring.  

I think that the product's ability to monitor the systems and applications are the most valuable features. We get alerts over email if there is an issue. We can also use it for our customer support incident and problem management. SiteScope can be integrated to have tickets created automatically when the alert thresholds are breached.  

We are evaluating AppDynamics as a potential solution. We want to understand how that compares to and may be better than SiteScope. So I don't know exactly at this time what can be improved, but that is why we are evaluating AppDynamics. We are taking the opportunity to compare the features in both of these products to see if SiteScope measures up to other products in the category.  

At this point in the comparison, I think what I would say AppDynamics does provide one capability that I think SiteScope does not. This is the ability to track a business transaction from the client through all the layers spanning the architecture. So there is more continuity in tracking from the user to the webserver to the database. This might be something that they could consider adding to SiteScope.  

So what I would like to see included most in the next release of SiteScope is the ability to do better transaction tracking. The other thing I would like to see is SiteScope should provide capabilities to display some graphs of information summaries. For example, say if I want to look at the resource utilization of a system or part of a system over a period of time, it would be nice to be able to get a quick preview of that provided in a graph to get a quick idea without a lot of other evaluation.  

We have been using it for five years at least, probably more.  

SiteScope is stable. We have absolutely no issues with that.  

It is easy to scale. We have about one hundred users in our company who are using SiteScope. Most of them are support engineers. I have no idea about the resources needed for maintenance because that is a separate team. The demand and usage are pretty high on a daily basis, but this does not seem to adversely affect performance.  

So far our experience with the product has been good enough that we have not had to contact technical support.  

We did not have a different solution previously, and at the time we adopted the product we thought that SiteScope was a complete solution. It is not bad, but in the last five years, we learned more about what we might want to see in the product and what is possible with this type of product. As this is the case we are evaluating AppDynamics currently.  

The main reason we are evaluating AppDynamics is because of the capabilities of business transaction tracking through the system. We think that AppDynamics will do this in a more satisfactory way for us and we do not have this feature with SiteScope.  

My advice to other people considering SiteScope as a solution in this category of tools is that I think SiteScope is a good product. It is definitely useful and provides a lot of value. I do not have any other advice in terms of being an end-user because all those things are not a perspective I have on the product.  

In general, I would recommend SiteScope. On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate SiteScope as an eight-out-of-ten.  

It has been used in a wide area of monitoring systems and network devices in my company.

It has multiple monitors that can be deployed OOTB, which includes basic system monitors for CPU, Disk, Memory, NIC's, etc. It does not use an agent, which might tax system resources.

Licensing is a little steep. 

SiS, the abbreviated acronym for the tool, used to be owned by another company. You could purchase the product with unlimited monitors for $2500. Since HP's acquisition of the product, licensing is done on a points-per-monitor basis. Each individual monitor costs x number of points, an HP sales rep has those exact numbers, which change, seemingly., at whim! :-) You just get an error that you cannot add more monitors without additional licensing! With OOTB you get a few, not enough though to monitor any numbers in a enterprise. And, with literally hundreds of nodes and application monitors, database, web, etc. available, costs can get steep!

We haven't had any issues with stability.

We haven't had any issues with scalability.

Completely agentless solution, i.e., no agent has to be installed on any services for monitoring, hence avoiding any troubleshooting of agents.

SiteScope is a very flexible solution. The organization where I have implemented this solution allowed us to create custom monitoring to suite the environment. When coupled with OMi and Service Manager, it gives a 360 degree view of the service availability and performance SLAs.

SiteScope supports several virtualization technologies (private and public), like AWS, Hyper-V, VMware, etc., without the installation of any extra modules. The dashboard is tablet friendly and supported anywhere on iOS and Android.

It can monitor over a 100 technologies with built-in solution templates (policies). Most importantly, one can even use SiteScope for monitoring application transactions recorded using Vugen.

Finally, SiteScope is available as a container for Docker, which is parts away from the installation & length upgrade procedure.

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.

No. SiteScope has built-in flat file DB, hence it removes the dependency of an external DB for higher stability.

No. SiteScope is highly scalable.

The support is good. Most importantly, the documentation is well-organized.

Depending on the requirement, we do recommend an agent-based solution. However, our overall first choice is SiteScope.

Has a simple setup. It can be up and running within hours.

I have implemented the solution myself for several organisations.

Not applicable.

SiteScope licensing can be node based-or monitor-based. I would recommend for node-based licensing.

For the first time users, it is recommended to make use of the experienced service provided for initial setup as they bring in experience and best practices.

No.

Go with a small install base (architecture) and gradually scale the solution.

• Agentless monitoring
• Different types of health checks
• Web-based UI for easy interaction
• End-to-end monitoring
• E-mail alert messages along with SMS features

System health check monitoring and email alerts after reaching threshold limits.

Monitor mobile health status too.

6 years

No

No

No

7/10

8/10

No

HP vendor

100%

Little expensive

Splunk and Gomez

No