We performed a comparison between ManageEngine OpManager and ScienceLogic 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."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"Flexibility in the two view dashboard helps viewers and admins get the information they need about the fetwork in a flash."
"Defining thresholds and other alerting criteria is fairly simple and would not require a lot of training. This is very useful if you are managing a large environment."
"The dashboard, versatility and larger horizon are valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the network-related reporting."
"The traffic monitoring and the traffic analysis are great."
"The most valuable feature of ManageEngine OpManager makes it easy to monitor all the network alerts on the application."
"You can put all of your work on there, they'll send you an email or send you a text. That functionality as a network engineer is the one I like the most. I do like the fact that we can schedule reports. That works too because that's a lot fewer spreadsheets that I have to create."
"The most valuable feature of ManageEngine OpManager is the management of the virtual machine and the host machine."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The power flow is great."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"They should add more features to URL monitoring."
"What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence. In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything. For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is." It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution."
"We would like the solution's customize and build functionality to be more user-friendly."
"We get a lot of false alerts."
"We had some stability issues at the outset that have since been resolved."
"The solution is a bit difficult to configure. There are quite a number of configurations and plugins that you must handle early in the process."
"You cannot resolve 100 percent of the issues yourself. You would need to reach out to the support. It needs to be cheaper."
"Needs an OVA, or more support for virtual deployments. Building a virtual instance of OpManager and OpManager Probe was a bit difficult because there was no OVA available."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"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."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews. ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and ThousandEyes, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our ManageEngine OpManager vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software 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.
