Data Center Real-User Monitoring (DCRUM), discontinued vs. ManageEngine Site24x7

Dynatrace Network Application Monitoring (NAM), formerly DCRUM, has improved greatly compared to when it was DCRUM; however, it still needs a lot of improvement in end-to-end flow capture with regards to network monitoring. Its alerting and integration capabilities are very good and easy to use. But it still needs a lot of tweaking in usability.

Incentivized

I have tried other tools (PRTG etc) in the past, and switched from US monitor to [Site24x7 All-in-One Monitoring], for all the built-in features and ability to implement by using with or without the agents deployed (ip discovery LAN). This is one tool that encompasses the entire organization and allows that single pane of glass feel (NOC screen view) for an accurate virtual snapshot of your entire organization, either cloud and/or LAN.

Incentivized

• Dynatrace Network Application Monitoring (NAM), formerly DCRUM, is very useful to find the network packet flow across applications
• It shows the application behavior in terms of end-user performance
• It integrates very well with other Dynatrace components

Incentivized

• Alerts: Site24x7 can be configured to send alerts in all sorts of ways, from email, to text messages, to even direct automated phone calls.
• Internal monitoring: An agent installed on one or more machines can monitor internal connectivity to other network devices. This means if connectivity to a server goes down, we often know about it before users alert us.
• External monitoring: Site24x7 also watched our websites and sends alerts if they're unreachable. It uses multiple locations to do so, which means if there's a partial network outage in some part of the country, we know who is affected.

Incentivized

• Its configuration requires a lot of technical and business knowledge to drive monitoring expectations to dashboards.
• DCRUM needs a robust monitoring architecture to store, analyze and visualize all collected data.
• DCRUM can't monitor the latest Microsoft Exchange versions.

• I wish the advanced monitors were not so expensive.
• It is a cloud solution, so it is necessary to open up outbound ports in all security zones.
• If you lose outbound internet service, all your internal servers will throw alarms and life gets extremely noisy.

Incentivized

Best of breed.

The only thing missing for a 10, would be if they texted or called you back.

I have only had to use support once, so I can't go into much detail about their support team. The one time I did use it the response was fast but the resolution took some time.

Incentivized

Nagios can't trace real user transactions from a front-end tier through a backend-tier,;with Nagios you only can monitor server availability and hardware issues. Riverbed is commonly used to determine networking issues without considering real user transactions impact on an application stack.

Site24x7 [All-in-One Monitoring] has some similarities to ThousandEyes. Especially in the troubleshooting aspect where both offer Web performance waterfall charts to analyze the issue better. Both have cloud-based servers globally that allow to determine performance on the Internet. Site24x7 has more features available so we selected it instead.

Incentivized

• It has reduced the number of war rooms as well as the number of people involved to address issues.
• It helps in utilization trending for network capacity.
• It has prevented poor solutions from hitting production.
• When the various business units launch own initiatives such as third party tools or new platforms, it's become extremly easy to detect.
• The reports help in the field of continuous improvement as any changes are immediately discovered and can be compared to history. Deviations from what you have decided as a tolerance corridor can be used to trigger alarms, both positive and negative.

• Positivity wise, we're spending a third of what we were on our website monitoring, this has allowed us to focus funding elsewhere (namely SolarWinds).
• We have enhanced our core monitoring by now also being able to provide better coverage, whereas we were handicapped with our previous supplier due to the scaling costs of multi-step transactions.
• The general feeling from our IT staff is that the platform is not great, which obviously reduces confidence in the ability for the platform to provide accurate monitoring data for our websites.

Incentivized