We performed a comparison between Infraon IMS and Microsoft System Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Cloud Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The role-based dashboards provide data points and charts and topology diagrams in a single window. It's like a spider web, where the application, connectivity, and everything is defined for each user of those applications."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"We use the solution to automatically trigger processes to help us resolve issues. The whole IT process has been automated, such as trying to map all the users and the escalation process. So, if any issue happens, we get an SMS and WhatsApp of the report. If there is a critical issue this has to be sorted out, like the entire data center being down, then there is an alarm."
"It is a stable product. After the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much. All systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"The solution is easily available. That's its most valuable aspect."
"The availability performance matrix and the reporting capabilities are the solution's most valuable features."
"I like the automated features of it that let you schedule those updates and the ability of the product to focus on the specific updates, specific platforms, and products that we're interested in keeping up to date."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft System Center is its GUI (graphical user interface)."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it helps us manage our company's application pool, license pool, application update pool, and OS updates."
"Many processes could be implemented out-of-the-box, and this helped to adopt processes in areas which we lacked."
"The deployment and asset management features are the most valuable. These are the product's main features."
"The detail in the alarms is great."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets. There are GDPR and other requirements that might require country-specific sensitive information to be filtered as well as other things that need to be taken care of. Normally, if we need to do any compliance, like ISO27000 compliance, they don't have such a report within their system. This kind of report is missing from their SaaS. That is one of the reasons that we have gone to the on-prem version, where I am assured that my data is secure."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
"I would like to see an integrated view of Infraon IMS and Infraon Desk. It would be very helpful if that were integrated into the solution."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"Could be more user friendly."
"Implementation and integration in the case of multi-tenant environments needs improvement."
"They should have some customized solutions or internal development, then maybe it could be easier to use different solutions or some self-developed solution."
"The platform performance and responsiveness need improvement. It still demands high computing resources."
"For me, the tool's UI seems to be too old."
"System Center hasn't updated to keep up with the industry. It needs improvements in the user interface, ease of use, and overall product functionality, particularly the cloud-monitoring features. It needs more capabilities to monitor AWS and Azure infrastructure."
"In Microsoft System Center, it is difficult to follow the steps to create dataflows at times."
"Less server consumption would help, as would better, more flexible reports."
Infraon IMS is ranked 41st in Cloud Monitoring Software while Microsoft System Center is ranked 29th in Cloud Monitoring Software with 18 reviews. Infraon IMS is rated 8.4, while Microsoft System Center is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Infraon IMS writes "Provides data accuracy for availability and policy harmonization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft System Center writes "Makes user management and application management easy for users". Infraon IMS is most compared with Zabbix and Microsoft Configuration Manager, whereas Microsoft System Center is most compared with Oracle SOA Suite. See our Infraon IMS vs. Microsoft System Center report.
See our list of best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Cloud 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.
