IBM Instana vs. TrueSight Operations Management

I would recommend IBM Instana based on its strengths in automating application performance monitoring, dynamic tracing, and its ability to handle modern, containerized environments effectively. The automatic discovery and mapping feature, along with AI-powered anomaly detection, provide valuable insights for proactive issue resolution. However, I would consider factors such as the organization's specific technology stack, scalability requirements, and budget constraints. Conducting a thorough evaluation, including a trial or proof of concept, would be essential to ensure that IBM Instana aligns with our unique needs and contributes positively to our technology and business objectives.

Incentivized

If you have a large or complex environment then this tool can be the perfect fit. From many types of OS, database, applications and web sites supported out of the box and powerful customization ability, TrueSight can manage the most complex. If you have a simple or small IT shop then this tool suite may be over-kill and not worth the complexity to set up

• Collecting Kubernetes and Infra level logs and presenting in easy to understand visuals.
• Tracing the end-to-end journey of an event and also categorizing by technology and Endpoints
• Built-in and custom alerts help to monitor almost all of scenarios without much additional configuration.
• Ability to create Applications to logical group important flows

Incentivized

• Centralize all monitoring agents in one tool.
• Big catalog of monitoring types (KMs).
• Powerful event manager.

Incentivized

• I believe that the "live" option in monitoring does not truly update the status in real-time, thus I must manually update to feel comfortable.
• The call analysis tool might be improved, third-party resources are restricted, and the pricing is slightly more than competitors in comparable categories.

Incentivized

• The interface is functional and adaptable but I kind of wish it looked like its predecessor Patrol Monitor.
• It is somewhat hard to understand the integrations into the UI.
• Hoping for more metric choices.

Incentivized

We chose IBM Instana for several reasons, and the most important one is that we didn't have to make changes in our code for nearly all of our applications for it to work. We are happy with the decision we made to use IBM Instana.

Incentivized

Datadog seems to have more freedom to build dashboards. They have more visualization types. However, Pulse seems to be better from a cost stand point. Pulse is able to accomplish everything we need, so no need to spend the extra cost.

Incentivized

• System down time is shortened as our ability to troubleshoot issues goes up.
• Potential downtime is stopped as we are able to slow down calls/ availability of calls in response to monitoring the dashboard.
• We are able to react to issues quickly through the smart alert system rather than manual checks.

Incentivized

• We have not figured ROI at this time.