We performed a comparison between Infraon IMS and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"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."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"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."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"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 solution primarily drives system information, and I believe it works fine."
"SCOM has improved our organization by simplifying the monitoring process. The system tells you what the bi-weekly or monthly usage was and that enables us to report this information to the manager. It shows if there was a connectivity issue that needs to be fixed and it's easier to concentrate on what needs to get fixed. System errors, therefore, get fixed faster."
"It works better than other products I’ve used – namely SolarWinds, which is cumbersome and error prone for web app monitoring. SCOM is not."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"Because it's Windows-based, it actually reports quite well. It reports everything you can think of on the Windows server and allows you to monitor anything. It's excellent for those in the Windows world as it's very good at it."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"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."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"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."
"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."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"I would like more customized reports. People should have some customization option on the dashboards for whenever they put multiple lists into it. Beyond customizing the content, there should be the ability to customize the colors so that they can engage some priority and mark challenges separately."
"All of the areas of reporting are very bad and need to be improved."
"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."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
Infraon IMS is ranked 78th in Network Monitoring Software while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 76 reviews. Infraon IMS is rated 8.4, while SCOM 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 SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Infraon IMS is most compared with Zabbix and Microsoft Configuration Manager, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, ManageEngine OpManager and AppDynamics.
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.