We performed a comparison between AppNeta by Broadcom and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"This solution helps prove that, if we move to cloud, we'll still be as effective as we are on-premises."
"Delivery and experience are valuable. The usage in terms of the traffic application captures and other similar things is also valuable."
"The main feature that we use is what they call Delivery, which is the testing of network paths end-to-end."
"A lot of times one of the AppNeta transactions showed that there is an issue, whereas everything seemed to be working properly. Once we dug into it, we realized that it really was highlighting a problem that otherwise we would not have seen."
"The product helps us understand networks and user experience. It helps us to understand the issues."
"We get complete, hop-by-hop visibility into the internet and we can know how much latency is taking place from one hop to another. That way, we know whether a particular hop belongs to the ISP, or that it is something owned by our own client's office, or is something to do with the SaaS network."
"The solution's technical support is very good."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"Being able to make and customize management packs and send out notifications is very valuable."
"It discovers the components automatically, which is a fantastic thing. The discovery works in an automatic way, and it has a dynamic way of discovering the components, assets, and applications. It doesn't require any manual intervention."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Having to deal with configuring the end devices using a USB stick is a bit cumbersome. It would be nice if there was a better way of handling that."
"Cloud monitoring could be better. That's one of the biggest pain points for me. I have shared this feedback with them multiple times, but they're limited to some extent. That's one area where I've seen a problem."
"They should try and make diagnostics run a bit quicker. When the problem occurs on a network, AppNeta runs automatic diagnostics on the end-to-end path. The path it was testing only to the destination, it now runs the same test to all of the devices and all the intermediate devices. Depending on the number of intermediate devices, it can take several minutes to run. If we're trying to find or diagnose a problem that only lasts two or three minutes, it may be that the diagnostics is still running by the time the problem is cleared. The only thing, which I have also mentioned to AppNeta in the past, is that there should be much faster and much more lightweight diagnostics, which can be completed within 30 seconds or one minute, rather than in 5 to 10 minutes."
"I would like to see some advanced dashboard features. It could also be integrated with third-party tools. For example, an integration with a reporting solution would be helpful. Out-of-the-box, there are few dashboards or reports. What it does have is useful, but there should be additional dashboards."
"AppNeta by Broadcom needs to add more features to its dashboards. It also needs to work on providing out-of-the-box reports."
"I think some of the product's documentation has shortcomings and needs improvement."
"Instead of integrating with other people, they should expand their interior capabilities."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"The end-user components, including the dashboards, the administration console, and the web console, need to be improved."
"System Center just provided upgrade and update features for Windows clients, and Windows systems, and did not support Linux, Android, or iOS, and other operating systems. They need to provide better integration with other operating systems if they don't already."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
"I would like to see them improve their network monitoring."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
AppNeta by Broadcom is ranked 20th in Network Monitoring Software with 17 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. AppNeta by Broadcom is rated 8.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of AppNeta by Broadcom writes "Excellent support, easy configuration, and a reliable tool to know what the problem is and where the problem is". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". AppNeta by Broadcom is most compared with ThousandEyes, DX NetOps, vRealize Network Insight, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our AppNeta by Broadcom vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.