We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Zenoss Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution effectively handles inventory management, deployment, and reporting."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is patch management."
"It works well for the endpoints for the customer I'm consulting. It has a bunch of knobs, and you can tune it to do lots of things."
"We're a Microsoft-centric organization, so we are happy with the integration between products."
"Technical support is very helpful and very responsive."
"The product is useful for patch management."
"It does the job and meets our needs. With everybody working remotely these days, we are using this solution to deploy everything. The deployment of PCs is easy."
"The scalability to deploy the package."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"It's easy to use."
"Devices like smartphones and tablets are managed very well on VMware, however, they are absent in SCCM. I could configure iPad from the VMware site and it was done very easily. It should be just as possible on SCCM."
"In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"The main thing is that SCCM has to become an appliance instead of a server. When I say appliance, it has to come preconfigured so that it is drop-shipped into the enterprise and then you activate the feature sets that you want. It should pull down all the latest binaries. Once that is all there, it should have a discovery tool which goes out and discovers the assets within an enterprise. If the server, workstation, and applications are all coming from the same vendor, why not have the vendor do this work for us and automate it as much as it possibly can?"
"The deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"The configuration of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could be improved, it is a bit complicated."
"The reports are too busy. They could be simpler. I'm a technician, so I don't care how pretty the reports look. They should be easy to read. I'm designing this for production folks. They need to read the reports quickly when they're patching in the middle of the night."
"They need to improve the support for the Mac operating system."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while Zenoss Cloud is ranked 22nd in Server Monitoring with 8 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Zenoss Cloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zenoss Cloud writes "Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Zenoss Cloud is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Splunk Enterprise Security and ScienceLogic. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Zenoss Cloud report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server 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.
