We performed a comparison between Pandora FMS and ServiceNow IT Operations Management 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."We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"This solution has screens that are easy to understand and provide a wealth of information."
"It allows me to quickly see the status of all of my printers, switches, computers, and virtual machines to determine if any system has fallen."
"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."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"The network monitoring and configuration within this solution is very good."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"I like the tool's CMBD connection with Discovery. The solution is also flexible."
"It helps streamline management and processes."
"The most valuable features of the solution are discovery, cloud governance, event management, and service mapping."
"Their Event Management is very good."
"The initial setup is very straightforward. A person just needs to join a team to access the network and that's all."
"The way this solution has helped us is that it improved our communication."
"It is a market leader and is very implementation-friendly. Developers have a clear understanding of how the solution works, and it is mature enough to handle different client needs."
"It is flexible. You can tune it, more or less, as you want."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"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 would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
"In the future, we may have double the number of devices, and we do not want to have any issues with performance in the data display."
"The product lacks APIs for integration with other systems."
"If you are new to using the solution, you will find the setup complex."
"My managers would say that the price is too high. We wanted to also have the visibility version of it, but it's too expensive for us. Going for visibility would have doubled up the price."
"The solution's licensing model is a bit complicated. It should be simple and easy for people to understand."
"The pricing is high."
"There is a slower learning curve associated with the tool's scripting part. It is also not cheap."
"The tool can be improved by including more detailed information to assist new users."
"Service Mapping is a time-consuming process. The time and effort versus the benefits are very difficult to articulate to customers."
"Lacks the ability to do its own monitoring."
More ServiceNow IT Operations Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Pandora FMS is ranked 25th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews while ServiceNow IT Operations Management is ranked 8th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 34 reviews. Pandora FMS is rated 9.2, while ServiceNow IT Operations Management is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow IT Operations Management writes "A very capable solution that includes a valuable, user-friendly workflow management tool". Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM, whereas ServiceNow IT Operations Management is most compared with OpsRamp, Moogsoft, Splunk ITSI (IT Service Intelligence), Datadog and BMC TrueSight Operations Management. See our Pandora FMS vs. ServiceNow IT Operations Management report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.