We performed a comparison between ScienceLogic and ServiceNow Discovery 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."I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Power packs."
"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."
"It is simple."
"The most valuable feature of ServiceNow Discovery is its performance."
"The solution finds public cloud infrastructures globally and updates the integration management database, service catalogs, and asset management details."
"We mostly use the solution's ITSM and ITOM capabilities in most workflows."
"It's pretty robust, and it's agentless for the most part. So, you don't need to deploy agents, which makes it a lot easier to stand up."
"It's a single system of record and it captures the relationships."
"Stability-wise, I feel it is a good product."
"ServiceNow Discovery has played a vital role in improving service visibility through automated IT service management processes, including change and problem management."
"Most fields on our forms are auto-filled, reducing manual maintenance for our infrastructure team. Post Discovery implementation there is hardly any maintenance."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"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 could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"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."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"Discovery, while a bit pricey, integrates well with other tools and offers a centralized discovery solution. These aspects could be enhanced in the new release."
"It's an expensive platform."
"Its integration with legacy apps is one area for improvement. ServiceNow Discovery offers out-of-the-box reports, and though that's okay, allowing easier report customization would improve the solution."
"What needs improvement in ServiceNow Discovery is the reporting UI because I didn't find it as friendly compared to other tools. Other tools have better reporting UI than what's currently in ServiceNow Discovery. What I'd like to see in the next release of ServiceNow Discovery is more user-friendly out-of-the-box reporting that would be helpful for non-technical users. Some users such as managers would want to just do a few clicks to access the reports and shouldn't be required to do search queries, but right now, reporting in the tool isn't very user-friendly."
"The current limitation requires having mid servers or discovery servers in each data center for proper discovery, hindering the ability to discover assets across continents such as Asia Pacific and Europe."
"ServiceNow is very costly."
"We would like more flexibility with the licensing. Discovery is bundled with ServiceNow's ITOM license. It was more affordable when it was sold separately, but we bought a package license to get more functionality out of the CMDB. We'd prefer to buy only the pieces we need instead of taking things we don't want or solutions that aren't yet mature enough to use."
"Instead of AI, even GenAI should be introduced in ServiceNow Discovery."
ScienceLogic is ranked 6th in Server Monitoring with 42 reviews while ServiceNow Discovery is ranked 3rd in Server Monitoring with 38 reviews. ScienceLogic is rated 8.6, while ServiceNow Discovery 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 ServiceNow Discovery writes "Valuable relationship building that discovers and auto-builds to make cleanup easy". ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas ServiceNow Discovery is most compared with Tanium, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Lansweeper, AWS Cloud Map and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor. See our ScienceLogic vs. ServiceNow Discovery 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.