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."
"Great customized dashboards and drill down reports with auto serve analytics."
"You can integrate clouds, hybrid infrastructure, and on-premise infrastructure into one product."
"Having all of our information within one tool set; our alerts, our monitors, and the things that our operations team needs to function."
"The feature that we've found to be very helpful is the way the solution categorizes the devices to identify groups, groups of devices and clusters. This allows us to be aware of their position within the topology."
"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 gives us visibility inside applications. It helps us to dig down and find the root cause of any issue within the network."
"Latest version of tool comes integrated with Jaspersoft reporting solution, giving excellent reports."
"What I like about DX Unified Infrastructure Management is that it's a very good product. The feature I found most valuable in the solution is the MCS feature, which is the automatic deployment of the objects you want to monitor. You can set up a system, for example, if it's a Windows machine and I want to test specific devices on it, I could do that through DX Unified Infrastructure Management. That type of deployment is very good because it means you won't miss any monitoring aspect on any server."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"When it comes to features, the power pack is the most valuable."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"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."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"I would like to see auditability. We've built our own audit functionality to ensure that every CI has the desired model configuration applied to it. And we run that on a daily basis. If that became part of the product, I think it might be a little bit less intensive in terms of resource, because we're doing it with scripts."
"The company has not kept pace with developments."
"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."
"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."
"A useful feature to have would be automatic configuration per standard by new robots that check in for any particular customer."
"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."
"Within this product there are individual probes, and each of these probes doesn't always necessarily output the same kind of information into our database. So when we try to collect what's called QoS data, from one probe we might get a ton of information, lots of good stuff that we can use in our database, but then from another probe, we might not get so much or we might not be able to pull the things that we want to."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"They should add CLI command modes and scripts for high performance."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"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."
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.