We performed a comparison between Pandora FMS and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"Thanks to this software and to the work of the support team, we have everything under control."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"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 monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"It can send messages to our ticketing system."
"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."
"SCOM has helped us to monitor all the VMs in our environment, especially the Windows servers."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"The solution primarily drives system information, and I believe it works fine."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We would like the real-time monitoring of an interface to be improved within this solution."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"It would be helpful to include the generation of reports for times that the network was out of service."
"Of course, price is always an issue with Microsoft and could be improved."
"The solution should have more tools for monitoring the cloud engine versus on-premise."
"Third-party tools have had to be created to make SCOM management pack creation more efficient and effective. However, this weighs down the application as it just adds a resource requirement, which is ballooning the size of the necessary storage and all that for essentially substandard components."
"They can focus more on cloud monitoring instead of on-premise monitoring. We should be able to monitor cloud-related applications. They can include this feature in the next release. If it is in the cloud, we can have scalability by using Kubernetes. The container is containerized, packaged, and managed using Kubernetes. This feature is not there in SCOM. Going forward, if they can focus on that, it will be great."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
Pandora FMS is ranked 29th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. Pandora FMS is rated 9.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". 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". Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and Nagios XI. See our Pandora FMS vs. SCOM report.
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.
