We performed a comparison between Azure Monitor and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Azure Monitor provides users with greater flexibility, customization options, and better troubleshooting features. The product integrates well with other Microsoft technologies and offers good log analysis, graphs, and charts, as well as reporting. While SolarWinds does have valuable monitoring capabilities, it needs improvement in terms of stability, flexibility, ease of use, performance, integration, and pricing. Azure Monitor has received more positive feedback on customer service and support, initial setup, and pricing, making it the preferred solution.
"I am impressed by the reporting on the average eight ports that we get from this solution."
"The tool's most valuable feature is the alert system, which can be set according to our metrics. The integration is smooth."
"The upside to the solution is if you are working in a Microsoft or Azure environment, it makes things easier."
"The most valuable feature is that it ensures our servers are up."
"Azure Monitor is useful because of the useful application insights and telemetry, such as metrics and logs."
"The most valuable feature is the universality of their functionalities in all Azure services, including, software solutions."
"It's a Microsoft native tool, so it works well with other Microsoft technologies, which is predominantly what our customer end-user base is."
"A product that is well-integrated for monitoring Microsoft Azure."
"The product integrates with Remedy."
"Monitoring the components on your devices with out of the box monitors or the ability to create new ones (SAM)"
"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."
"I adore the NTA module that provides deep details on ingress/egress traffic for any interface. With a few clicks, you can correlate who is accessing what and when, beside the bandwidth consuming applications/users."
"The more valuable feature of this solution is the Exchange feature."
"The solution is great for monitoring. If something is going wrong, we can immediately find the root cause."
"The initial setup was relatively easy, and we didn't have to install anything. All we had to do was put on the devices we wanted to monitor."
"I find it to be a strong product suite, particularly when you need a comprehensive monitoring tool."
"If it is configured incorrectly, you can end up with a huge bill."
"Automation related to gathering metrics from more applications could be improved."
"The query builder could be better. In comparison to other monitoring tools, in order to use Azure Monitor, your engineers need to have KQL experience. If they don't, it's not intuitive as a system."
"They need to work with other cloud providers - not just Azure."
"I need connectivity with cost management."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"n comparison to New Relic, which I've used before, it's a bit more complicated. It's not as easy to use. It also took some time to get it working. The implementation needs to be simpler."
"We encounter some difficulties in monitoring the operating system on its own."
"They should incorporate more artificial intelligence. There should also be more predictive features."
"The tool’s report feature created issues for us. We needed to gain skills to use that feature. The tool’s customization is not easy since you have to reconfigure the whole system."
"The current script monitoring feature has limitations, especially when dealing with custom scripts."
"There is one feature that is a report writer. And they are currently trying to take it out from being a stand-alone application and integrating to the web. This doesn't give us the flexibility and it doesn't expand what we can get when it comes to reporting. So, putting it on the web is going to make it difficult to get some information. Leaving it where it is now will help us a lot."
"This product has no real downside unless they fail to continue development of its capabilities."
"Some custom applications cannot be monitored, and a lot more applications need to be included."
"SAM AppInsight for SQL: The ability to ignore fragmentation of specific indexes."
"It should also be easier to upgrade SolarWinds. AppDynamics is harder to deploy but easier to upgrade. So AppDynamics takes a lot of time and effort to install, but you can upgrade it in minutes. SolarWinds is the opposite. It's easy to deploy, but upgrades take forever. To date, nobody can complete it on time, so the production environment is sitting idle."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Monitor is ranked 4th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 44 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 18th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 38 reviews. Azure Monitor is rated 7.6, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Azure Monitor writes "A powerful Kusto query language but the alerting mechanism needs improvement". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". Azure Monitor is most compared with Datadog, Dynatrace, Sentry, Prometheus and AppDynamics, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus, Nagios XI and ServiceNow Discovery. See our Azure Monitor vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.