We performed a comparison between Loom Systems and ScienceLogic 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 solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"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."
"The power flow is great."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"Power packs."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
"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."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"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."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The product is not user-friendly."
Loom Systems is ranked 57th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews. Loom Systems is rated 8.0, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Loom Systems vs. ScienceLogic 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.