We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and ServiceNow Discovery 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 main, clear valuable feature is updating the latest, patches and updates from Windows. This is the main feature we really utilize a lot."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward."
"There is a faster time to rollout. If we get a new PC, it can be ready for productivity right away."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"I like a lot of the reporting capabilities and baseline configurations."
"The solution is stable."
"It is a very good solution. It has a good interface and is easy to use. On top of that, it is very reliable in terms of distribution as well as getting the report."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"In the past, I found troubleshooting difficult in ServiceNow Discovery because I didn't have much exposure to the platform during that time, but then I explored some troubleshooting features, and I found that it wasn't that tough, so this is one of the qualities I like about ServiceNow Discovery. I also like that log reading in ServiceNow Discovery is much better than other tools. Another valuable feature of the tool is that you don't need to install many tools to deploy ITSM. You only need to subscribe to the modules to deploy the proper ITSM in your organization."
"I like ServiceNow Discovery's overall structure and the way data comes in without creating a different dashboard or interface."
"They provide the ability to see into the Discovery tools I want. They offer the best tool view."
"The solution can prioritize the discovery of IP ranges. The product automatically places all Discovery CIs into the correct class within the CMDB."
"The process involving the original setup of the solution is excellent."
"We can scale the solution."
"This solution provides excellent insights."
"I am impressed with the tool's incident problem change management."
"The database should be made to be more stable and robust, but not so much the configuration."
"It would be better if reporting were more user-friendly. I would like to see an upgrade in the reporting structure in the next release. At the moment, you have to use an SQL query or configure it to pull reports through the graphical user interface. Their updates could be more regular. I think Mircosoft updates it every six months. They are also moving many things to Intune, and Microsoft decided to move the deployment solution there. I think SCCM is getting old, and Intune is new."
"The setup was complex and I faced a lot of problems initially because I was new to the solution."
"The main thing is that SCCM has to become an appliance instead of a server. When I say appliance, it has to come preconfigured so that it is drop-shipped into the enterprise and then you activate the feature sets that you want. It should pull down all the latest binaries. Once that is all there, it should have a discovery tool which goes out and discovers the assets within an enterprise. If the server, workstation, and applications are all coming from the same vendor, why not have the vendor do this work for us and automate it as much as it possibly can?"
"The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed."
"In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments."
"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."
"It is a bit of an old and outdated product."
"In my opinion, it's quite slow compared to other tools, like Device42. Also, there are predefined fields in Device42 that are not available in ServiceNow. These are the basic things I think can be improved here."
"Discovery, while a bit pricey, integrates well with other tools and offers a centralized discovery solution. These aspects could be enhanced in the new release."
"When you switch versions, for example, when you go from Paris to Quebec they will introduce many new things and occasionally things break when they do that."
"Without improvement in the patters, applications can't be discovered"
"The solution is too high priced."
"Instead of AI, even GenAI should be introduced in ServiceNow Discovery."
"In future releases, I would like to see more AI-oriented enhancements in the solution. It would automate most of the things that we have to do manually write the scripts and go on the teleservice, what to do. So if we have something in place and if we can train the module, then AI would be a good thing."
"Improvements are required with the scripts used to collect the information from servers."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while ServiceNow Discovery is ranked 3rd in Server Monitoring with 37 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while ServiceNow Discovery is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ServiceNow Discovery writes "Valuable relationship building that discovers and auto-builds to make cleanup easy". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Microsoft Intune and BMC Client Management, whereas ServiceNow Discovery is most compared with Tanium, Lansweeper, AWS Cloud Map, ScienceLogic and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. ServiceNow Discovery 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.
