We performed a comparison between Icinga and SCOM 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."
"I like the ability to amend and adjust things really easily, which is useful in a case where you could make it auto-discover and then set a template to say all of these applications or servers under this template have an automatic threshold set that you’d set up manually."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"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."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"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."
"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."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"The stability has been great."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"This solution satisfies all of the requirements that we need for our Windows-based systems, so if you are using the Windows platform then this is an easy solution."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"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."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"The user interface should be improved."
"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."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"The installation and configuration are very complex."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"Of course, price is always an issue with Microsoft and could be improved."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Icinga is ranked 21st in Network Monitoring Software with 17 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Icinga is rated 7.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. 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 SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Datadog, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager. See our Icinga vs. SCOM 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.