I am interested in improving the flexibility of ScienceLogic's user interface, configuration, and customization. I am particularly keen on learning about issues raised by the ScienceLogic support team. Whenever we encounter difficulties, I raise vendor cases and am eager to deepen my understanding of those cases. Additionally, I want to learn more about ScienceLogic's dashboards, which display crucial metrics about collectors, their health, and devices aligned to them. The dashboard should be more detailed. Regarding improvements to ScienceLogic's technical support, my last company was IBM in India, and I worked on IBM MQ monitoring until my last day. I engaged with the LogicMonitor support team for MQ-level incidents, but these issues remained unresolved even after 10 to 15 days. On my last working day, I assisted with one such vendor case, and I am unsure if that issue was ever resolved. ScienceLogic's technical support should respond more efficiently in terms of time. During my time working on MQ-level cases, including a power pack upgrade that did not fix the issues faced, I provided all necessary steps with the help of the middleware team. However, there were still gaps that needed addressing.
ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services. If the knowledge for implementation could be spread through articles, it would reduce this dependency.
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.
The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required. The tool is more or less good. The tool needs to improve its APM capabilities.
The user interface could be improved. The sizing and footprints of the central environment need improvement, too. The solution lacks functionality. The main issue is the granularity of user management.
Admins do not have direct access to the reporting. It goes first to the AIOps team, who have access to reports. They forward based on what is required and requested through us. We have to follow up protocols to get through that. It needs improvement.
There are a lot of interventions when we go through professional services. The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment. Then, the deployment will be quicker, and we need not rely upon ScienceLogic’s core professional services team. Some automated reports must be improved.
Assistant Management Specialist at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2022-07-06T14:16:00Z
Jul 6, 2022
The back end is all right. However, when we are in the documentation area, we don't get any details. We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information. Maybe they should do more Power Packs. We do take requirements from the customer. If they want to add to Power Packs, we need to write our own custom scripts. It might be helpful to already have it included.
Senior Consultant at a tech services company with 201-500 employees
Consultant
2020-10-04T06:40:14Z
Oct 4, 2020
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.
ScienceLogic excels in customizable dashboards, seamless integrations, and real-time data analysis, supporting diverse IT environments with multi-tenant capabilities.
ScienceLogic provides robust infrastructure and network monitoring, catering to cloud, applications, and server environments. It supports hybrid setups, integrating with CMDB and ticketing systems while automating incident management. ScienceLogic's PowerPacks eliminate visibility gaps and its adaptable nature supports...
I am interested in improving the flexibility of ScienceLogic's user interface, configuration, and customization. I am particularly keen on learning about issues raised by the ScienceLogic support team. Whenever we encounter difficulties, I raise vendor cases and am eager to deepen my understanding of those cases. Additionally, I want to learn more about ScienceLogic's dashboards, which display crucial metrics about collectors, their health, and devices aligned to them. The dashboard should be more detailed. Regarding improvements to ScienceLogic's technical support, my last company was IBM in India, and I worked on IBM MQ monitoring until my last day. I engaged with the LogicMonitor support team for MQ-level incidents, but these issues remained unresolved even after 10 to 15 days. On my last working day, I assisted with one such vendor case, and I am unsure if that issue was ever resolved. ScienceLogic's technical support should respond more efficiently in terms of time. During my time working on MQ-level cases, including a power pack upgrade that did not fix the issues faced, I provided all necessary steps with the help of the middleware team. However, there were still gaps that needed addressing.
ScienceLogic is working towards a kind of AI, DKAIRA enablement, but I find one dependency is the frequent need to rely on professional services. If the knowledge for implementation could be spread through articles, it would reduce this dependency.
Integrating observability and APM monitoring into the overall portfolio would be beneficial.
There is room for improvement in the speed of setting up the service and integrating PowerPacks. Although these prebuilt features are great, there is considerable complexity in bringing them together to create a unified dashboard. Even with many good integrations and deep visibility, the implementation takes time, especially when it doesn't involve these integrations. While some other companies have easier APIs, using this solution demands significant expertise. It's challenging for new customers to implement independently. The implementation speed of non-PowerPack or non-out-of-the-box integrations should be improved. Additionally, the AI automation feature is not yet very rich due to resource constraints supporting a wide platform.
The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required. The tool is more or less good. The tool needs to improve its APM capabilities.
The user interface could be improved. The sizing and footprints of the central environment need improvement, too. The solution lacks functionality. The main issue is the granularity of user management.
Admins do not have direct access to the reporting. It goes first to the AIOps team, who have access to reports. They forward based on what is required and requested through us. We have to follow up protocols to get through that. It needs improvement.
There are a lot of interventions when we go through professional services. The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment. Then, the deployment will be quicker, and we need not rely upon ScienceLogic’s core professional services team. Some automated reports must be improved.
ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier.
The back end is all right. However, when we are in the documentation area, we don't get any details. We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information. Maybe they should do more Power Packs. We do take requirements from the customer. If they want to add to Power Packs, we need to write our own custom scripts. It might be helpful to already have it included.
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.