We performed a comparison between ScienceLogic and SolarWinds AppOptics 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."Power packs."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The power flow is great."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"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."
"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 tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"The product has a great dashboard."
"The reporting of the solution is very good."
"The sum solution, NTA, and DPA."
"Technical support is always live and they're supportive."
"Some of the most valuable features of SolarWinds are the topology discovery and network performance analysis."
"I have found the most valuable feature is application performance management."
"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."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"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."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"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."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"In terms of the technology, I think they need to put some more advanced troubleshooting into SolarWinds, in terms of AI capabilities. That's the next generation, especially in the cases of APIs which have already adopted AI capabilities into their products."
"The solution should be more user-friendly."
"AppOptics would benefit from having a much more centralized view."
"The implementation needs improvement. It needs to get modernized with the newer cloud scenario in both public and private deployment models."
"The integration with Unix services should be a bit more straightforward."
"I would like to see more integration with other tools that are available on the market."
ScienceLogic is ranked 12th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 42 reviews while SolarWinds AppOptics is ranked 50th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds AppOptics is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds AppOptics writes "Unique features allow consolidating and combing metrics into a single dashboard, but don't monitor mobile solutions". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix, whereas SolarWinds AppOptics is most compared with Dynatrace, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, Zabbix, Datadog and New Relic. See our ScienceLogic vs. SolarWinds AppOptics report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.