We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Nagios XI based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is easy to install, and quick to deploy."
"I manage software updates and operating systems for devices, and within seconds, we can remotely deploy a system for, say, 2,000 devices. Not only that, but we can also deploy scripts and create comprehensive compliance rules."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to learn."
"It does the job and meets our needs. With everybody working remotely these days, we are using this solution to deploy everything. The deployment of PCs is easy."
"The major features of this product are the reporting tools. The most valuable features are package deployment and application deployment. Security management is also good because any vulnerability will be identified, and you can fix it. It's the best tool because you never know what kind of client you will have. For example, you may have your offices in low bandwidth remote areas. But it's achievable because it accommodates the bandwidth that you have available. Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is an excellent reporting tool for your environment. If you want to know the details about the hardware configuration, software configuration, what is causing a problem, or when a new feature update comes in for Windows, even that goes on SCCM itself. A lot of deployment stuff."
"SCCM is a stable solution."
"One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined process has significantly improved our software distribution workflows."
"The most valuable features are Remote Connect, SUP, Cloud functionality, Report, Query, and third-party patching."
"The features I've found the most useful are the plug-ins, the fact that you can connect almost everything to it. That's very useful."
"Nagios allows us to configure any device so that we can send pager alerts when people don't have access to emails. It also allows us to schedule downtime and maintenance."
"Since this is an open source technology, if we are capable of writing the plugins in any scripting language, this product allows us to monitor anything we want."
"An excellent solution that is easy and intuitive to implement."
"Nagios XI helped me to draw the network and check for system failures."
"Though I downplayed the administrative NCC GUI, this is by far the strongest aspect of the Nagios XI product."
"It's great for monitoring IT services infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of processes."
"Microsoft should extend support for additional platforms."
"I would like to see more automation."
"The solution is a bit heavy on the sources such as RAM or CPU and the software needs to be a bit lighter."
"The cost of the product can be improved."
"There is a reboot issue with the patching. Sometimes, if patching runs into any issue whatsoever, it doesn't reboot but it doesn't tell you it errored out. It just sits there and we don't find out until the next day whether it patched or not. That was a big issue for us. We're working through that. They added some stuff in there now where you can actually tell reboot is pending. But we still need some kind of notification that if something fails or is pending, we know. We shouldn't have to go in and look. They don't have anything for that right now."
"The tool's deployment can be cumbersome."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"The solution does not support remote devices so the CMG is still required."
"I would like to be able to extend it to all of our data centers, whether they are in the cloud or not. It would be helpful if I could connect everywhere."
"The product does not have SAP monitoring."
"The PNP4Nagios plugin not working easily with XI is an issue for me, because some open source monitoring plugins do not work out of the box. But in the end, you learn to live with it."
"The way Nagios displays information isn't easy for a new user to understand. It's not intuitive enough. You need to read some tutorials or be trained to understand what it's displaying. Also, I think it needs more features to improve network visibility because there are some things you can't detect."
"We'd like to see more integration capabilities."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"The product uses the backend as Perl and could be modified to a more lightweight solution like what's being offered by other vendors."
"I would like a much easier GUI so that I can delete events and logs, which will free up a lot of space."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while Nagios XI is ranked 5th in Server Monitoring with 54 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Nagios XI is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Microsoft Intune and Tanium, whereas Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Nagios XI report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server 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.