We performed a comparison between Azure Network Watcher and ManageEngine OpManager 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."
"What I like most about Azure Network Watcher is that it's focused more on the architecture. I also like that it has a packet capture feature that tells you how the packet travels and whether it's exiting Azure, etc."
"The solution is good for monitoring device behavior."
"The most valuable features I have found are typology, visualization, and capture."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Network Watcher is the cloud-native application firewall. It is helpful for securing databases."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Network Watcher is using the gateways with the connections. The monitoring is useful for the logs and application insights into the data. The traffic filtering issues when it comes to deploying those applications are helpful."
"It provides good visibility."
"I like the visibility."
"Defining thresholds and other alerting criteria is fairly simple and would not require a lot of training. This is very useful if you are managing a large environment."
"The solution is finely stable."
"Device monitoring is a good tool of this solution."
"I liked Network Configuration Manager. They had some pretty decent features there, and they also had pretty good monitoring and alerts."
"The most valuable feature of ManageEngine OpManager makes it easy to monitor all the network alerts on the application."
"Some of the useful features are NetFlow and analytics."
"The integration with the firewall monitoring, the security monitoring, is great."
"It is easy to use and deploy."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I would like to see in the future if we can troubleshoot as a firewall because it is equipment as a network player and some diagnostics."
"Lacks sufficient security features."
"I still use Wireshark and Azure Network Watcher to get the required data. My team captures the traffic from Azure Network Watcher, downloads it, then imports that traffic into Wireshark to get more details on the number of hits and replies, for example. If you can do that on Azure Network Watcher and have Wireshark built-in, that would make Azure Network Watcher better. If Azure Network Watcher has that functionality where you won't need a third-party tool to get what you need, that would be helpful. I'm also expecting more from Azure Network Watcher. It's more complex than knowing how the IP flows from its source to the destination. The tool also needs more open-source features, such as having some built-in Wireshark that improves monitoring for customers. Sometimes, you encounter a VPN tunnel, network, or routing issue, but finding out more about the blockage is challenging. Is it one hundred percent an Azure issue? Is it a peer issue? You don't get complete information from Azure Network Watcher, so you must use other tools and depend on your strategies to resolve a specific issue. If more features could be added in the next release of Azure Network Watcher, specifically ones you can find on open-source tools, then that would be a plus point for the tool."
"Azure is good, however, the Fortinet GUI is more intuitive and I like it more than anything else."
"The initial setup and deployment could be improved to be simplified."
"The solution could improve by limiting the need to clarify the logs. When the clarification is minimized, it is better for everyone involved."
"Azure Network Watcher could improve by having other built-in applications. For example, an application to log activities for in and outbound traffic."
"The initial setup and initial learning curve could be improved to be easier."
"ManageEngine OpManager could improve by having a better cloud presence."
"The storage level monitoring needs improvement. It needs storage level monitoring on the server itself. That feature is lacking right now."
"The integration with various OEM products could be simplified."
"The licensing model is confusing."
"OpManager is slow but that just might be the server we have it on. I don't think that's the problem but I don't do the server. But it is slow. When you're interacting with it, it could be more nimble and could be faster."
"The pricing of the solution is high. They should work to adjust the pricing model to see if they can help reduce costs."
"Needs an OVA, or more support for virtual deployments. Building a virtual instance of OpManager and OpManager Probe was a bit difficult because there was no OVA available."
"It is sometimes difficult to manage the user interface. It can get very complicated."
Azure Network Watcher is ranked 34th in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. Azure Network Watcher is rated 7.8, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Network Watcher writes "Helpful database security, good support, and beneficial cloud-native application firewall". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". Azure Network Watcher is most compared with Microsoft Network Monitor, Nmap, PRTG Network Monitor, SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer and ThousandEyes, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and Nagios XI. See our Azure Network Watcher vs. ManageEngine OpManager 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.
