We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Oracle Enterprise Manager 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."The cloud account management is a valuable feature."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"The solution effectively handles inventory management, deployment, and reporting."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to learn."
"It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the availability of being able to manage the Microsoft estate. It handles many areas, such as asset management and tracking."
"The most valuable feature is the graphical-based reports of software updates that have been successful, the ones that have failed, and a summary of where the failures are what security breaches may occur."
"It has the ability to perform mass distribution."
"It's easy to implement as it's made by Oracle for Oracle."
"There are a number of different user interfaces you can choose from."
"I like that it's stable."
"The most valuable feature is high availability."
"It is a stable solution...The initial setup of Oracle Enterprise Manager was straightforward."
"It is a scalable solution. So far, my company has not faced any issues with the scalability part of the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring because it's very useful for checking and troubleshooting compared with other products, like Nagios for example, that have some interaction with Oracle."
"It is the best monitoring tool for Oracle databases."
"They should improve their anti-malware policies like the SCEP policies. For instance, you can't have different policies for different servers, there is only one policy in all the servers, and everything is covered under that. For example, say you want to scan one group of servers on Saturday, and then you want to scan another group of servers on Sunday, you can't do that. You have to scan all your servers, a regular scan or a full scan, on the same day and at the same time. That's definitely one thing they need to resolve. In the next release, it would actually be nice if they included Apple products. It will also help if you can use Intune again. Their compliance reporting feature could also be better. They can maybe work a bit on that for patching now. It would be better if SCCM came with the functions of Right Click Tools built-in. If SCCM would have all those functions already built-in, we won't have to go and spend $5,000, just as an add-in from another company to get those functions."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"The time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved."
"In terms of the monitoring, the timeframe it takes to actually report back on the compliance of a device after it has been patched is a bit too long."
"In spite of us being a premier customer we find the support unsatisfactory."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could improve the integration."
"The deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"It would be better if automation options were available. For example, in Nexthink or SysTrack, there is an analytical tool. Creating dashboards would be very easy if you implement the same thing in Microsoft. That report will be a daily cost to the customers and good revenue for our organization. The price also could be better. In the next release, we need to include some features like tables, dashboards, surveys, services, and metrics in the dashboard. Whatever we are implementing will be downloaded by a report. Apart from the report, we will telecast from the dashboard. It's very easy to compare, and it will be easy to telecast to the end-users."
"Reporting and statistical charting is largely still left up the end-user to develop custom solutions."
"Technical support could be faster."
"The solution's agents work with Java, and the Java code sometimes consumes a lot of memory on the CPU."
"They should improve the hover text context. This would provide assistance whenever a task is attempted by a DBA."
"We could use it but definitely with some effort we can streamline much better and sometimes some box here and there, like 13C you have to really wait, but there are great features. Just have to make sure it is a stable product."
"My opinion is that this solution needs to improve consolidation. That is what our business needs the most right now."
"Oracle Enterprise Manager could improve the monitoring types and the graphics."
"I would like to improve the cost."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while Oracle Enterprise Manager is ranked 4th in Server Monitoring with 123 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Oracle Enterprise Manager is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Enterprise Manager writes "Provides good stability and has an easy implementation process". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Oracle Enterprise Manager is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Quest Spotlight, AppDynamics and PRTG Network Monitor. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Oracle Enterprise Manager 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.