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 delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"It is reliable when it comes to monitoring."
"I recall the initial setup being straightforward."
"The number of probes available. Out of the box, I believe about 200 probes are available. And, if there's a probe that is not available, you can write one. You can also go to the communities and suggest, and based on demand, CA will write one for you."
"It's easy to push out across numerous servers. Very scalable."
"DX UIM is scalable."
"This solution allows us to have an overview of the infrastructure and identify areas where the performance isn't optimal, or where upgrades could be carried out."
"We are able to go in and actually leverage the thick client for a nice easy drag and drop solution."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"Power packs."
"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."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"It needs a little bit more functionality in the Admin Console."
"There is also room for improvement in the reporting. It is not really good enough, according to our customers. So what we now usually do is use Power BI to get them the kinds of reports they want."
"Making a GUI with criteria such as selection by robot/hub/probe etc."
"Currently lacks a mobile application which would be helpful."
"A useful feature to have would be automatic configuration per standard by new robots that check in for any particular customer."
"I'm very happy with DX Unified Infrastructure Management, but what could be improved is its user interface because currently, it has many wide spaces. All the information you need is in DX Unified Infrastructure Management, and it's a reliable tool, and though that's more important than the gaps in the user interface being smaller or wider, those gaps still need some improvement. I know the team is working on it. My company had some backend problems with DX Unified Infrastructure Management in the past that have now been solved. The setup for the tool also needs improvement because it's complex. Another room for improvement in DX Unified Infrastructure Management is its technical support because it's sometimes not as knowledgeable or responsive. What I'm suggesting to be added to the tool is an open-standard ELK Elastic-based database where you can put in all data, so that you can use the data in other systems as well."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"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."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
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.