We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and ScienceLogic 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It is reliable when it comes to monitoring."
"Great customized dashboards and drill down reports with auto serve analytics."
"It is very scalable."
"It delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"Easy admin functionality. You can quickly do all the admin functionality without reducing cycles."
"I recall the initial setup being straightforward."
"Another division handed us the opportunity to monitor their solutions as written, and UIM was very useful for that."
"The monitoring of the applications to let our business know when things are performing and that they're up and available."
"Power packs."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"CA UIM needs some improvement with performance reporting (if we compare it to CA eHealth)."
"They need to continue to advance the filter capabilities, and provide more input fields."
"Reporting capability can be improved especially when it comes to availability."
"How we can get more native information from CA's solutions."
"The other element is that there are no real templates, out of the box. Let's go with an example where we do have the probe, which is great, and we do have a really nuanced customer with a small set of devices that maybe not a lot of other customers use. There might not be a template in place, so effectively we have the tool in front of us but we still need to develop a solution. So it would be really nice to see a little bit more of something like a central repository of templates that we could use. That would help us expedite our onboarding process."
"The only challenge that I have with this solution is the reporting part. The users are not really comfortable with the kind of reports they are getting. Sometimes, they want to see reports in their own format. Customizing those reports with Jasper is not very easy. It could be because of the knowledge gap. If you have the knowledge of how Jasper can be configured to suit customer requirements in terms of reporting, it is good. There was a time a customer complained about one issue related to Netflow analysis. Broadcom has a separate model for that, but the customer wanted everything bundled together. It could also have IP management so that I am able to see or analyze IPs so that the IPs that are already in use don't get assigned."
"We have experienced challenges with finding a mechanism to deploy the agents, but it's only on the first deployment so it's not a big issue."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"The product is not user-friendly."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 37th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SCOM, ManageEngine OpManager and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow Discovery. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Cloud Monitoring Software vendors, and best Server Monitoring 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.