We performed a comparison between Nagios Core 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."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Provides timely notifications."
"Our customers like that Nagios Core is an open source solution. It can be customized to our customers' specific needs."
"The notifications are definitely one of the most valuable features of Nagios Core. We know what to look for and what to expect when things are down."
"Key features include the GUI interface, its notification capabilities, and the real-time reporting."
"It has made the life of the network operations staff more proactive in managing the resources of the infrastructure. It prevents disasters long before they can take place."
"Nagios Core is stable."
"We mostly use Nagios Core to integrate with Python and Bash Script."
"The most valuable feature of Nagios Core is it allows us to develop and add as many plugins as we want."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"SCOM has helped us to monitor all the VMs in our environment, especially the Windows servers."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is real-time alerts."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"Making it a little easier to configure and set up from the start would help. There are multiple layers that you have to wade through to be able to set it up, to do it the right way, and to get it to do what you want it to do."
"We're using the free version, which limits us in terms of the things that we can do. If we had the paid version, a lot of our issues would probably go away. For example, we can't isolate instances that are being built or updated with the production ones. When they're being built, on Nagios, they're showing in red. It'd be nice to be able to partition those off until they're all green, and then we can bring them into the environment. This is probably because we've got the free version and not the paid version. If we went for the paid version, it would probably allow us to do exactly what we want to or remove the restrictions that we have, but if we are able to isolate instances in the free version, it would make life much easier."
"The user interface could be more interactive because it is pretty basic."
"The mapping is a little hard."
"The UI is a little outdated and graphics could be displayed in a better way."
"The scalability needs improvement, it's not scalable at this time."
"I would like to see a sensor that shows the traffic of a user and what they're doing on the network."
"It would be nice if the company offered a sales or contract manager that was dedicated to our company so that we would have some sort of link to Nagios, and if we had issues or questions, we'd be able to contact them directly."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
"Direct integration with third-party tools, like ticketing systems, is lacking but would be beneficial."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Nagios Core is ranked 7th in Network Monitoring Software with 46 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Nagios Core is rated 8.0, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Nagios Core writes "An Open Source Fully Featured Data Centre Monitoring Tool". 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". Nagios Core is most compared with Nagios XI, Zabbix, Icinga, Centreon and OP5 Monitor, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager. See our Nagios Core 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.