Back to Blog Landing

End User Experience Monitoring Methods Comparison

Mike Marks June 15, 2017
A comparison of synthetic monitoring, Javascript injection, Real User Monitoring, and device-based approaches to End User Experience Monitoring

end user experience monitoringTruth be told, the lines between End User Experience Monitoring (EUEM) and Application Performance Management (APM) are pretty blurry.

It’s easy to see why. Gartner’s Magic Quadrant for APM lists Digital Experience Monitoring as the first of three functional dimensions of Application Performance Monitoring. This makes sense. After all, developers and IT Operations teams need to consider how application parameters like availability, latency, response time, and usability appear to the end user. And they must determine how many end users are affected when they troubleshoot app problems.

So, it’s no surprise that every Application Performance Management vendor now touts End User Experience Monitoring as part of its solution.

A comparison of the differences in approaches to End User Experience Monitoring

The result is a confusing End User Experience Monitoring market. Understand the differences between these four approaches to EUEM to ensure you choose a product that addresses your needs.

1. Synthetic monitoring

Synthetic MonitoringSynthetic monitoring runs a script that simulates users’ interactions with key applications. IT programs the scripts to run from various locations at regular intervals. For this reason, some refer to this method as “robotic testing.” Synthetic monitoring products proactively identify major execution or availability issues that could affect user experience.

This approach determines application baselines and identifies availability issues, even for applications that are not used around the clock. It also works well for applications that access third party services using APIs.

Creating and maintaining the scripts on which synthetic monitoring relies can be time-consuming. More importantly, synthetic monitoring only emulates user experience. It does not measure actual end user experience.

So, while synthetic monitoring can identify application performance issues in general, it cannot identify or help resolve any particular end user’s complaint. This limitation presents a problem for the service desk. If a user calls the service desk with a problem, this solution tells them nothing about what the end user was actually doing or experiencing.

2. JavaScript injection

This method of End User Experience Monitoring injects JavaScript code into a web application to time what happens on the end user’s browser. JavaScript injection can also call 3rd party apps. Unlike synthetic monitoring, JavaScript injection does monitor actual end user experience. But it works only for web applications and hybrid mobile apps. IT teams must also monitor the end user experience of client-server apps, apps that run on virtual infrastructure, and apps hosted by 3rd parties.

Although JavaScript injection can monitor web applications as the user sees them, it does not have visibility into the performance and health of the user’s device. So, it won’t be able to tell app development or desktop services teams that the app is slow because the end user’s device is under-resourced.

Monitoring application performance of SaaS, or other applications that are hosted outside of the enterprise’s data center requires a different approach. In these situations, IT must inject Javascript using proxy servers or load balancers. This work-around adds complexity, expense, and implementation challenges for fragmented network topologies.

3. Real User Monitoring

Real User Monitoring (RUM) relies on network-based packet capture from the network, browser, or application for End User Experience Monitoring. This method collects network-based response time and error metrics that affect end user experience, such as HTTP/HTTPS or other network transactions on the wire, such as TCP. Unlike synthetic monitoring, RUM collects metrics that reflect actual (or real) end user experience. Hence the name.

To use this approach, IT must identify the optimum points in the network to aggregate and filter traffic for analysis. Although hardware based approaches becomes more expensive as network speeds increase, the packet aggregation and brokering equipment gear can also be used for security and network management.

While RUM solutions collect data that relate to end user experience, they do not provide visibility into the actual screen render time within the browser or application. A web or network request traverses the wire in a millisecond. But it can take 10 seconds or more for the screen to render if there is heavy client-side processing or a large volume of data.

Real User Monitoring doesn’t work for the broad array of enterprise applications that are not web-based. It also doesn’t work for activities that don’t generate network traffic, such as opening a cached email. Like synthetic monitoring and JavaScript injection, RUM approaches lack visibility into the performance and health of the user’s device.

4. Device-based End User Experience Monitoring

Device Performance Monitoring (DPM) solutions address part of what’s required for End User Experience Monitoring. DPM products use light-weight agents to monitor the health and performance of end users PCs, laptops, and virtual desktops. They track operating system metrics like resource utilization and health. Some DPM products also can identify installed applications and identify app crashes. These metrics certainly relate to end user experience. But they don’t provide any visibility into how end users are actually experiencing the applications they use.

Aternity is a device-based End User Experience Monitoring product that takes the next step, by doing all of this and more.

End user experience monitoring business activities
Aternity monitors business activities, like “look up a patient record”

Aternity monitors the performance of applications as they render on the screens of the user’s device. Further, Aternity monitors the performance of business activities performed by the end user. These are company-defined user interactions with applications in the context of a business process. For example, “look up a patient record,” or “process a claim,” or “check inventory.” Aternity automatically generates baselines for what constitutes acceptable performance for these activities. It generates alerts when performance deviates from baseline. Unlike DPM products, Aternity presents a true picture of end user experience, by correlating these three streams of data together – device health and performance, application performance as seen by the end user, and user behavior.

Aternity End User Experience Monitoring, Digital Experience Monitoring
Aternity monitors the actual end user experience of every local, web, SaaS, or thick client app, running on any device. It tracks “click to render” time for the business activities the user conducts on all of their apps, and provides color-coded status to indicate deviation from baselines.

See Aternity for yourself

With millions of endpoints managed in our SaaS environment, Aternity enables customers to get up and running fast, with no major capital investment, hardware provisioning, or server deployment. Start your free trial today to see how you can improve the end user experience of your digital workforce.

And learn the answers to frequently asked questions about what is End User Experience Monitoring.

You may also like

digitalexperiencemonitoring
Five Reasons Your Digital Experience Management Strategy Could Fail

You can be sure your CEO has digital experience on his or her radar. According to Gartner’s 2017 CEO Survey, CEOs

Read More
Not All Approaches to End User Experience Monitoring Are Created Equal

A detailed look at four methods of end user experience monitoring

Read the paper
The ROI of Aternity End User Experience Monitoring

An analysis of the quantifiable business benefits Aternity customers achieve

Read the paper