OpenText SiteScope vs. TrackJS

It can be used to monitor the uptime and availability of the URLs in the production and non production environments and detailed reports of the URL availability can be extracted to check, monitor the performance of the URL in variety of regions from where it is accessed. It requires specific knowledge of integration with the other Micro Focus tools for alerts generation and routing to correct focal points, so needs to improve a little on the UI part of the tool as it is a licensed tool and needs to ace the game for many free tools are also available in the market, which can do the job.

Incentivized

If you're not currently doing any JS error tracking or are just getting started, TrackJS is a great solution. If you are looking for a more technical solution, something like NewRelic may be more appropriate - but if the primary user isn't going to be a web developer and you're looking for something that is easier to use, I would recommend TrackJS.

Incentivized

• Custom monitors with custom thresholds, timing, polling, and many other configuration options.
• Custom ways to alert and notify. Of course you have email and text message capabilities, but SiteScope also allows for specific messages and variables within those messages to be sent out so that your alert is data filled and you can know exactly what is going on and why you received that specific alert.
• Monitor templates for quick and rapid deployment of one's standard set of monitors. Easy ability to "copy" and "paste" monitors so there is no need to re-create from scratch.
• Scripting. SiteScope also allows for custom scripts to be called from specific alerting triggers. This allows for HUGE and POWERFUL customization and automation through SiteScope. You can easily have scripts that "take action" on a specific alert so you don't have to!!
• Very easy to use in my opinion. Learning curve is very short and you can master this system fairly quickly for all of the depth of customization that it offers.

Incentivized

• Easy to use
• Time report is great
• Great level of detail

Incentivized

• SiteScope could be a bit more user friendly.
• The interface is very "clunky" and slow. It is also difficult sometimes to find what you are looking for.

Incentivized

• Price is a bit high
• More customizable alerts would be great
• Would love more detail related to site speed

Incentivized

Very straightforward and easy to use once you get past the short learning curve.

Incentivized

Can't really answer this. Setup was easy and no support has really been used at this point.

Incentivized

I will begin by saying that I "inherited" SiteScope". So, it really was not my choice as to whether or not I was going to use it. Also, we were so heavily ingrained in SiteScope, that it would have taken a HUGE overhaul of our monitoring system to switch to something else.
SiteScope does not have a discovery option. Not like others you may have sampled (i.e. SolarWinds). The plus is that you monitor exactly what you want with no plethora of other junk you may not want. The "negative" is that you must set up all the monitors. I know I did mention the templates and copy/paste features, although it can be streamlined, it is still a manual process for each server. SiteScope is all a very manual process while others crawl your network and discover stuff.

Incentivized

TrackJS is less technical and is easier to use than New Relic. New Relic provides more data, but is virtually unusable if you're not technical.

Incentivized

• Checking processes using a ps command and other indexing steps is very expensive in splunk.
• Infrastructure monitoring is no more an issue for our company after getting HP sitescope.

Incentivized

• ROI has been positive. We've identified a few issues that we wouldn't have otherwise found without TrackJS.

Incentivized