"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"They have great integration with the active directory."
"The advantages of SCOM are that it is definitely user friendly and a more appropriate solution for what we need."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"It's easy to use."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"It discovers the components automatically, which is a fantastic thing. The discovery works in an automatic way, and it has a dynamic way of discovering the components, assets, and applications. It doesn't require any manual intervention."
"I like the historical reporting of observer metrics."
"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."
"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 should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"The dashboard features are not user-friendly for our management team, only for the technical department."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"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."
ScienceLogic is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 2 reviews while SCOM is ranked 1st in Event Monitoring with 14 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 9.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Responsive support, high availability, and agentless ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Feature rich, scalable and user-friendly, but open-source products are free and do the same thing". ScienceLogic is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus and Nagios XI, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, SolarWinds NPM, PRTG Network Monitor and Nagios XI. See our SCOM vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Event 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.
