We performed a comparison between ScienceLogic and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor 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."When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"It is simple."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"SSL Certificate Monitoring and Expiry Alerting"
"It is simple to implement and can provide fairly decent Windows-based monitoring, beyond simple SNMP. It is great for monitoring newbies and smaller shops."
"Extremely user friendly: Any IT professional can learn how to admin NPM in a short time."
"The most valuable feature of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is its powerful monitoring capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"Monitoring the components on your devices with out of the box monitors or the ability to create new ones (SAM)"
"The most valuable feature is the Access Rights Manager."
"The component and cable monitoring are good. SolarWinds is more intuitive and user-friendly than AppDynamics. The AppDynamics console is more complex because it's a more feature-rich solution, so it's not easy for somebody to pick it up."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"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."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"The major concern in the product revolves around application performance monitoring since end-to-end application monitoring is not possible with the tool."
"Reporting is the only thing with which we currently have challenges. They have this in two ways. There is the report writer, which is the backend, and we also have web reports, which are on the console. So, they have removed the report writer for the backend reports, and we are making use of the web console, but most of the users are not finding it very interesting to use the frontend reports. I would like them to bring back the report writer. That's the key area within it to improve on the reporting. If they can bring back the report writer, then most users will actually be comfortable. I have some customers who are trying to export their report to an Excel format, but it is not possible because they said any report that has been done from the web console cannot be exported to Excel, but most of the customers need to export their reports to Excel. That's one area they need to work on."
"Nodes in Azure are able to be monitored with the use of agents, but this does not apply to cloud service offerings that are not node based."
"SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor could improve the server monitoring and the web application monitoring features are not good. Microsoft SCOM has better server monitoring."
"This product has no real downside unless they fail to continue development of its capabilities."
"SAM's software-defined network monitoring capability is also low and could be improved."
"The stability, flexibility, and ease of use could be improved."
"Some custom applications cannot be monitored, and a lot more applications need to be included."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
ScienceLogic is ranked 6th in Server Monitoring with 42 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 11th in Server Monitoring with 38 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow Discovery, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and ServiceNow Discovery. See our ScienceLogic vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor 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.
