Airbrake vs. Omnissa Intelligence

Airbrake is very good at what it does, I don’t really have any criticism at all on that front. It’s less well-suited when bugfixing goes beyond the immediate error and means looking at a lot of context (particularly asynchronous context) like logs.

Incentivized

Crittercism is best as a bread crumb trail, stack track logging service to debug applications when you have an issue detecting a problem in your application. Its strength is not as a real-time logging platform to allow you to view production logs in real-time. However, it would be an extremely beneficial feature for Crittercism to add.

Incentivized

• Integration with most of languages and frameworks as well support via existing logging configs.
• Aggregations on occurrences which helps to understand and analyse issues better.
• Web UI displays all error related parameters which I never could have figured out in manual debugging.

• Identifying crashes users are experiencing.
• Allowing us to see how many times the crash occurred.
• Allowing us to see what times the crashes have occurred.

Incentivized

• We use Airbrake in conjunction with OpsGenie, but I feel like there could be more room for integration between the two.
• I think it would also be nice if there was a GitHub integration that would comment on recently merged error-prone PRs, currently, we need to dig into the error to find the commit.
• Generally, more integrations would be nice as people often forget about Airbrake when they are stressed out about an issue.

Incentivized

• Pointing to exact line number of the crash
• A more explicit navigation bar (a little confusing for the user)
• Third-party API specific crash reporting (instead of just listing the endpoint)

Incentivized

I love to use Airbrake and New Relic in conjunction. New Relic has better metrics and data that you can really dig into (especially for optimizations), but the error part has always been kinda meh. I fee like Airbrake has done an awesome job at this

A similar product we use is Conviva. I personally prefer Crittercism as Conviva seems to miss things fairly often. Critter tends to catch most issues as long as development has set the app up for it. I've had to reproduce issues several times before Conviva catches it whereas Crittercism will catch it on the first try

Incentivized

• Hugely reduced frontend errors in devices we don’t often test: means more conversions and sales
• Lets us know immediately when there is an error: shorter error durations also means higher sales
• Ultimately once we’ve solved all the most common bugs: more time for developers to focus on other things

Incentivized

• Allow us to release iOS versions quicker to the app store
• Help us solve bugs and view bread crumb trails on money-making actions within the API
• Points us to problems in the stack trace with a direct correlation to our route creation aspect in the app

Incentivized