We performed a comparison between Icinga and Pandora FMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Icinga has multiple automation and integration features. There is an API for everything and a web UI for configurations. The APIs enable you to automate tasks in Icinga. We can also use plugins to talk to the API. The Icinga Director talks to a database in the background, and you can import settings from the CMDB to all systems in Icinga."
"It is really easy in Icinga to create your own plugin and integrate it without any fuss. And it works just perfectly fine."
"The best thing about the solution is how it highlights errors, the issues, and what needs my attention. The solution directs me to areas that I should look for first."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"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."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"The user interface should be improved."
"Icinga’s automation could be improved."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"In general, the product does not look good. However, it does what it is supposed to do. So, the improvements should focus on usability and UI."
"I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built."
"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."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"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."
"We would like the real-time monitoring of an interface to be improved within this solution."
Icinga is ranked 22nd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. Icinga is rated 7.6, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Icinga writes "A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor and Nagios XI. See our Icinga vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring vendors, and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
