We performed a comparison between Elastic Observability and Pandora FMS 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."The ability to ensure that the data is searchable and maintainable is highly valuable for our purposes."
"It is a powerful tool that allows users to collect and transform logs as needed, enabling flexible visualization and analysis."
"Good design and easy to use once implemented."
"The solution allows us to dig deep into data."
"Machine learning is the most valuable feature of this solution."
"The most valuable feature of Elastic Observability is the text search."
"The architecture and system's stability are simple."
"Its diverse set of features available on the cloud is of significant importance."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"Thanks to its flexibility, I have been able to adapt the tool to our servers and find out quickly how their console works."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"The network monitoring and configuration within this solution is very good."
"Pandora's architecture is interesting. It's open so you can easily extend and enhance it. It's simpler to customize Pandora compared to other solutions. It's also scalable enough to support large environments."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"Elastic Observability’s price could be improved."
"The solution would be better if it was capable of more automation, especially in a monitoring capacity or for the response to abnormalities."
"Elastic Observability is difficult to use. There are only three options for customization but this can be difficult for our use case. We do not have other options to choose the metrics shown, such as CPU or memory usage."
"The cost must be made more transparent."
"The tool's scalability involves a more complex implementation process. It requires careful calculations to determine the number of nodes needed, the specifications of each node, and the configuration of hot, warm, and cold zones for data storage. Additionally, managing log retention policies adds further complexity. The solution's pricing also needs to be cheaper."
"Improving code insight related to infrastructure and network, particularly focusing on aspects such as firewalls, switches, routers, and testing would be beneficial."
"If we had some pre-defined templates for observability that we could start using right away after deploying it – instead of having to build or to change some of the dashboards – that would be helpful."
"The price is the only issue in the solution. It can be made better and cheaper."
"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."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"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."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"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."
Elastic Observability is ranked 10th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 22 reviews. Elastic Observability is rated 7.8, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Elastic Observability writes "The user interface framework lets us do custom development when needed. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Elastic Observability is most compared with Dynatrace, New Relic, Azure Monitor, Sentry and AppDynamics, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and Centreon. See our Elastic Observability vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, best Log Management vendors, and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.
