We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and Pandora FMS 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."The Elastic User Interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. You need to have some Javascript knowledge. We need that knowledge to develop new custom tests."
"It has always been a stable solution."
"The price is very less expensive compared to the other solutions."
"The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"The solution is open-source and helps with back-end logging. It is also easy to handle."
"The solution has been stable in our usage."
"Elastic APM has plenty of features, such as the Elastic server for Kibana and many additional plugins. It's a comprehensive tool when used as a logging platform."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"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."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"The network monitoring and configuration within this solution is very good."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"It is easy to create your own custom modules if you just know a little bit of scripting. If you have unique requirements, you can just make your own modules. You can even grab checks from other vendors. There are open-source checks for various things such as SMTP, etc. There is a long list of different ones from Nagios. You can just use them, and within seconds, you get yourself a check that is monitoring whatever you need. It is really flexible. I guess that's why they call it Pandora Flexible Monitoring System (FMS). It is reliable. It does the job, and it alerts. It is also surprisingly feature-rich. Our network guy just recently asked about a particular protocol to monitor the bandwidth on the network, which is not a common protocol. When I looked it up, and I found that they cover it. It is very mature for a not-so-known product."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"If we had some pre-defined templates for observability that we could start using right away after deploying it – instead of having to build or to change some of the dashboards – that would be helpful."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"Improving code insight related to infrastructure and network, particularly focusing on aspects such as firewalls, switches, routers, and testing would be beneficial."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"Elastic Observability needs to improve the retrieval of logs and metrics from all the instances."
"The solution would be better if it was capable of more automation, especially in a monitoring capacity or for the response to abnormalities."
"The interface could be improved."
"There's a steep learning curve if you've never used this solution before."
"Pandora FMS is relatively new, and the interface with the older version crashes at times. We have several different operating systems, such as Linux and Windows, and Pandora does not run as well in these."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"Their support is good, but it is just online communication. It would be great to be able to just call someone and talk to them instead of always writing. It works well for me because I am a decent communicator in email, but some people might find it difficult to describe in a written fashion and communicate with them that way. There is a learning curve to the interface, but once you get used to it, it is actually very powerful. They have a lot of options, but people struggle with the interface. They've improved it though, and it is getting better. They need to keep improving the learning curve to help buy-in. I'm the guy that manages it, so I'm comfortable with it. They can refine the upgrade agents to be easier. They can also do more refinement in end-user usability because not everyone is strong technically, and people who aren't strong technically might be averse to the product, even though it has come a long way. It has a complete GUI and everything."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
Elastic Observability is ranked 10th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 25th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, AppDynamics, Azure Monitor and Sentry, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Elastic Observability vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, best Log Management 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.