We performed a comparison between HPE OneView and Pandora FMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The easy user interface was what I found most valuable in HPE OneView. For example, if I wanted to know the infrastructure status or I needed to send in any change commands, HPE OneView had simple buttons."
"Easy to add servers and get them monitored and manageable."
"I don't have to use CD-ROMs or anything like that to provision the servers."
"The most valuable features of HPE OneView are environment monitoring, the ease of firmware upgrade, and the ability to manage all the servers and the infrastructure from one team."
"The OneView Global Dashboard is very user-friendly and it can be used for monitoring the power consumption and temperature of the data center and racks."
"It's rather simple to use, and that's very important for us."
"We lose less time managing the machines."
"The stability is very good. I have never had an issue with it over the three years that I have been using it."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"Thanks to this software and to the work of the support team, we have everything under control."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"I would like to see support for things that aren't in the current generation. We have a lot of 7th and 8th generation hardware."
"It's a little slow sometimes. Overall, I think it does what it's supposed to do. I think that as they evolve it, it'll get quicker."
"The solution's console can be improved by making it more user-friendly and adding the capability to filter the reports out using only the information required."
"We've had a few issues. We just upgraded to the 3.9.0 version. We think that now that we are on that version, hopefully a lot of those things are going to go away for us."
"The solution could add storage, integration services, and end-to-end support for Cisco switches or other competitor products."
"The interface is a bit bland. It does its job, but it could have a better interface."
"They can improve reporting and provide more customized reports. Currently, reporting is a bit limited. It can be complex to learn and manage for beginners. Because of my experience, I find it comfortable to manage, which might not be the case with beginners. It would be good if they can make it a little bit easier to understand. They can provide a more graphical view of connectivity and other things. Their technical support can also be improved."
"It needs more reporting capabilities."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"Their support is good, but it is just online communication. It would be great to be able to just call someone and talk to them instead of always writing. It works well for me because I am a decent communicator in email, but some people might find it difficult to describe in a written fashion and communicate with them that way. There is a learning curve to the interface, but once you get used to it, it is actually very powerful. They have a lot of options, but people struggle with the interface. They've improved it though, and it is getting better. They need to keep improving the learning curve to help buy-in. I'm the guy that manages it, so I'm comfortable with it. They can refine the upgrade agents to be easier. They can also do more refinement in end-user usability because not everyone is strong technically, and people who aren't strong technically might be averse to the product, even though it has come a long way. It has a complete GUI and everything."
HPE OneView is ranked 17th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 80 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews. HPE OneView is rated 8.0, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of HPE OneView writes "Provides firmware compliance and the ability to connect to iPO". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". HPE OneView is most compared with Dell CloudIQ, Cisco Intersight, Zabbix, Lenovo XClarity Orchestrator and SolarWinds NPM, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, SolarWinds NPM and Nagios XI. See our HPE OneView vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.