We performed a comparison between SCOM and Zenoss Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Event Monitoring 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."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"Being able to make and customize management packs and send out notifications is very valuable."
"The advantages of SCOM are that it is definitely user friendly and a more appropriate solution for what we need."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is the capability of using classes within your management pack development."
"SCOM has improved our organization by simplifying the monitoring process. The system tells you what the bi-weekly or monthly usage was and that enables us to report this information to the manager. It shows if there was a connectivity issue that needs to be fixed and it's easier to concentrate on what needs to get fixed. System errors, therefore, get fixed faster."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"The solution primarily drives system information, and I believe it works fine."
"It can send messages to our ticketing system."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"It's easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Regarding certain issues in the solution, it can be difficult to generate reports if we have a program that is not user-friendly for reporting. While this is not necessarily negative, we may need to use another solution."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
"The solution should have more tools for monitoring the cloud engine versus on-premise."
"SCOM needs to improve its usability."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 78 reviews while Zenoss Cloud is ranked 11th in Event Monitoring with 8 reviews. SCOM is rated 7.8, while Zenoss Cloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zenoss Cloud writes "Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features". SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics, whereas Zenoss Cloud is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, ScienceLogic and IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus. See our SCOM vs. Zenoss Cloud report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Event 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.