We performed a comparison between SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor and Alluvio Aternity based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is a more comprehensive monitoring tool than Alluvio Aternity, offering infrastructure dependency mapping and network devices' performance monitoring. While Alluvio Aternity provides valuable machine health and performance data, it lacks code-level monitoring and software-defined network monitoring capability. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is the preferred solution.
"Alluvio Aternity is stable."
"The user experience it provides is the most valuable feature for us."
"It is a tool that helps me check users' computers really quickly without having a help desk administrator logging in and doing analysis. Anyone who has access to Aternity, including our support team, can log onto Aternity and do a quick, basic analysis."
"Other features we use heavily are the WiFi analyzer, the Skype for Business analyzer, and the troubleshooting functionalities. We also use the Device Health quite religiously here for troubleshooting devices that are unhealthy, when we're talking about things like high CPU or memory consumption, or file system problems within the users' workstations."
"The most valuable feature is the alerting. As soon as we click on an incident, it takes us directly to the problematic PC. It's a direct solution. We click on an alert and it takes us to the incident details. The details show in different colors, in a graphical representation, and I like that the most."
"The most valuable thing that you get from Aternity is very broad visibility. You get visibility of your network, of your endpoints, of your software usage, your application performance, capacity, in one pane of glass. We had 20 to 30 IT tools, including application performance monitoring, network monitoring, security, endpoint detection, network protection, capacity management, service management — every kind of monitoring you can imagine. But Aternity was always the first place that I turned for anything, because you can see everything in it."
"We could resolve issues that they had been facing for months or years. They had been having the same issues, the same performance problems, whether it was Excel taking a long time to load, or network instability, or voice call problems, and we would fix it in minutes, in front of them in a meeting, with absolute confidence. It would just blow their minds."
"The item we use the most and what upper management wants is the SLA reports. It's a good summary of how the applications are performing over time from month to month."
"Management Console - Managing service to each server enrolled in the Solarwinds is much easier. Using a web base console, you can control your service much convenient way. There is no need to login remotely. It save a lot of time and effort."
"I find it to be a strong product suite, particularly when you need a comprehensive monitoring tool."
"It is simple to implement and can provide fairly decent Windows-based monitoring, beyond simple SNMP. It is great for monitoring newbies and smaller shops."
"I'd rate technical support at eight out of ten. They are helpful and fast."
"The initial setup was relatively easy, and we didn't have to install anything. All we had to do was put on the devices we wanted to monitor."
"The features like trends, capacity planning, recommendations, and diagnostics are the main items I focus on for added value."
"Manage Groups: The capability to group appropriate devices gives better visibility of sites, categories, or critical regions. The same can be used to represent a dashboard for higher management."
"The solution can be deployed quickly."
"I want more reporting around asset management, with greater flexibility and customization ability."
"Integrating the tool with other products is a challenge."
"Its user interface and features should be improved. They don't support new versions of certain Linux editions. That is one of the reasons why we have to move to another solution."
"The solution is available at a higher price than other solutions."
"They've additionally added some great color coding, but they need to explain better and drive down further on the meanings of this workflow."
"When they moved from Version 8 to Version 9, the customers lost so much control of what they could do with the product."
"The dashboards and navigatability of the platform could use improvement. It often takes five or six clicks to drill down to exactly what you want to see."
"We are waiting for the GA release of their agent. I hope they can do better when they release their endpoint agents. Right now, we are not able to measure some applications, core applications, because it's relying on a specific version of the agent and that agent has not come out yet and there's no ETA. I would like to see them speed up time to market when they release agents."
"The templates could use improvement. Currently, they are quite complex. They should have drag-and-drop functionality instead. It would make it easier to use."
"Reporting is the only thing with which we currently have challenges. They have this in two ways. There is the report writer, which is the backend, and we also have web reports, which are on the console. So, they have removed the report writer for the backend reports, and we are making use of the web console, but most of the users are not finding it very interesting to use the frontend reports. I would like them to bring back the report writer. That's the key area within it to improve on the reporting. If they can bring back the report writer, then most users will actually be comfortable. I have some customers who are trying to export their report to an Excel format, but it is not possible because they said any report that has been done from the web console cannot be exported to Excel, but most of the customers need to export their reports to Excel. That's one area they need to work on."
"The setup was complex. We had local support to assist us."
"Some custom applications cannot be monitored, and a lot more applications need to be included."
"It needs time-based functions for monitoring. Some things need to be polled on a specific schedule or only during a specific window."
"One area that could benefit from improvement is its performance"
"An additional feature that would improve this solution is the ability to complete root cause analysis."
"Nodes in Azure are able to be monitored with the use of agents, but this does not apply to cloud service offerings that are not node based."
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Alluvio Aternity is ranked 21st in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 37 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 18th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 38 reviews. Alluvio Aternity is rated 8.4, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Alluvio Aternity writes "Not only helped us know which devices to refresh, but helped us determine if a refresh was even necessary, with factual data". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". Alluvio Aternity is most compared with Dynatrace, Nexthink, SysTrack, AppDynamics and Azure Monitor, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Nagios XI. See our Alluvio Aternity vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
