Application performance management (APM) companies all seem to think that they are uniquely qualified to help organizations monitor and manage their end user performance and application performance. Correlsense is one of those companies. When they sent along a release touting their "Real User Management" tools for mobile apps, I asked them to tell me what differentiated their approach from all of the others.
Here is a summary of Correlsense' answer:
Complete end-to-end view: Other mobile APM tools can give you a partial view of what a mobile transaction looks like (either from the device itself or on the infrastructure side), only RUM for Native Mobile Applications can trace the entire mobile transaction from the device to the data center and back
Real monitoring as opposed to synthetic: RUM for Native Mobile Applications monitors 100 percent of users (not samples or averages), providing an accurate picture of mobile app availability, response times, and service level performance
No instrumentation: Companies don't need to change code or introduce high levels of production overhead to implement this mobile APM solution.
When asked, Correlsense's representative presented the same or extremely similar reasons I've heard time and again from others. This, of course, means that they really can't differentiate their offering from offerings made by other suppliers.
While the company may be able to help its customers learn more about performance issues in a complex, distributed, multi-tier application environment, it is not at all clear why decision makers should chose them over others.
What is clear is that the performance management market, in general, and the end user experience market, in specific, has become overly complex. It is also clear that customers have built environments that are nearly too complex to manage, and the marketplace isn't helping them find simple solutions.
What does your company do to monitor and manage the customer- and staff-facing applications it relies on today?