We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) 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."
"The network mapping is an excellent feature, as each device is represented by a different shape or object, which is great for helping us, our staff in training, and our customers understand how the network is structured. Seeing the bigger picture helps immensely, as we provide remote support; we're not boots on the ground."
"I like Auvik's mapping. Your home dashboard has a map view where you can see potential issues on the endpoints. If an AP or switch has a problem, you can drill down into those to see how it's affecting the endpoints."
"The traffic insights and the configuration management are the most valuable features."
"The monitoring and management functions of Auvik are as easy as they can be for the functions they do. It's definitely the easiest product I've ever used."
"One of the best things about Auvik, and it's why it's one of my go-to products, are the remote access capabilities. Without a VPN and without any other way in, I'm able to get in and work on and troubleshoot my devices through the remote access console. It has multiple options for that and has been very useful and a huge time-saver. That's one of the killer features. It's one of my must-haves and that's why I like it so much."
"I appreciate Auvik's traffic insights."
"I found the ease of setup to be a helpful feature. The appliance was quite quick to get running. The fact that Auvik is a cloud-based solution, as opposed to an on-prem solution, meant there was one less thing to worry about. I didn't have to configure another device or provision a server and support it myself."
"I like the feature that allows us to remote access and remote troubleshoot many of the devices, including terminal Windows."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"The stability has been great."
"They have great integration with the active directory."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"SCOM's most valuable features are the network path feature, reporting, and integration with business intelligence."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We're having difficulties with Auvik's regular maintenance windows. They do the maintenance on the cloud side, which affects the on-prem collectors that gather the logs from the different network assets."
"The user interface could be less cluttered."
"The solution can improve by increasing the tech file management capability."
"Configuring alerts is pretty tedious. It would be nice if they had a wizard who walked you through instead of having everything turned on or off from the start."
"Onboarding devices could be easier. When you first add a device to the Auvik platform, you need to add each one by hand. It would be nice if they could automate the process where we only need to run a script."
"Implementing a configurable dashboard for the network map would enhance user experience in this regard."
"The window view could be improved. For instance, if I'm in inventory and I'm looking at my devices, I don't like the way the window splits at the bottom. I want to be able to choose the way it appears. Similarly, when it shows me all the devices on my network, I don't like the fact that I can't adjust the display to the way I want it."
"I require the monitoring of Linux devices and it doesn't support them. Although we've done a trial, we're not going to carry on with it. We've already gone with another product. Also, seeing the topology is quite useful, but it's not really suitable for a large enterprise."
"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."
"The price could be improved."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
"All of the areas of reporting are very bad and need to be improved."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 131 reviews while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". 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". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, Meraki Dashboard, SolarWinds NPM and Zabbix, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our Auvik Network Management (ANM) 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.