We performed a comparison between IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Event Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is an easy-to-use solution."
"Probes are the best feature because they are well written which rarely requires you to write additional rules. These probes monitor activity within your environment."
"The monitoring is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The most valuable feature is the event management capability."
"The biggest plus points for me are the configurability and scalability of the solution, as well as the multi-tenancy of the platform."
"It is customer-centric. Customers can access the event list from their location or desktop and view the event. There is no need to go and connect to any other server and run events to have a view of all the events happening in the environment. We get a good response from customers about this feature and the main architecture of NetCool. Its processing is very good. Deduplication and correlation functionalities are good in this solution as compared to other solutions. A big advantage of NetCool is that it also supports multi-layered protocols. We can receive multiple events from different protocols like UDP, HTTP, and those events can be captured in NetCool."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"It is simple."
"Its integration could be better. They should provide an easier integration for all the monitoring stuff, and it will make things easier for us. Currently, there is a complexity in integrating it with a vendor application, and we have to use another tool to integrate it with a vendor application. To integrate some applications with NetCool, I need to install an IBM tool on top of it. It would be good if they can provide an API or any kind of interface that we can leverage while developing a new protocol interface or application. We should be able to use an API or interface with NetCool. Its GUI can also be better. As compared to other tools, it is not user friendly, and it is not easy to do stuff through GUI. Whenever we do anything on the GUI, it takes time. They need to focus on the GUI part, especially the dashboard. They should focus on how users can effectively drill down from one box to another. The visual appeal of the dashboard is as important as the data and functionality."
"The web portal and typical event controls are a little outdated."
"The cost of the product is quite high. They should work to adjust their pricing models."
"There should be an easier-to-understand model, more of a flat-structured model rather than different tiers of licenses which complicates licensing."
"Its technical support team takes longer to reply."
"I would like for the next release to be more user-friendly and out of date. The next release should focus on the cloud, AI, and ML technologies."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus is ranked 7th in Event Monitoring with 10 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 5th in Event Monitoring with 42 reviews. IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus is rated 7.2, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus writes "Good event management features and supports SNMP devices well". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus is most compared with ServiceNow IT Operations Management, BigPanda, IBM Tivoli NetCool Impact, PagerDuty Operations Cloud and SCOM, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer. See our IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Event 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.
