We performed a comparison between Icinga and ManageEngine OpManager 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."
"Icinga does the job and is fairly stable."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"The value of Icinga is that it has hundreds of plugins, so it's really easy to monitor pretty much anything."
"I like the ability to amend and adjust things really easily, which is useful in a case where you could make it auto-discover and then set a template to say all of these applications or servers under this template have an automatic threshold set that you’d set up manually."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"The ability to customize scripts and build your own queries to request information from the infrastructure elements you want to monitor. This level of personalization and customization is highly appreciated."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"The most valuable feature of ManageEngine OpManager makes it easy to monitor all the network alerts on the application."
"The solution gives pretty good network visibility. I am also impressed with it's monitoring."
"It is easy to use and deploy."
"This is a good general monitoring system that has all the features we require and they constantly update with new capabilities."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to reach most of our network devices and get the most from them."
"Device monitoring is a good tool of this solution."
"We use the solution to monitor links. It also helps us to track servers and monitor logs."
"Flexibility in the two view dashboard helps viewers and admins get the information they need about the fetwork in a flash."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"It needs Trap SNMP. I saw the documentation for Zabbix, that it has its own built-in product which handles SNMP traps, and there's nothing similar in Icinga or Nagios. I think this feature is most important for me."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"There is room for improvement in multi-tenancy. It's not perfect, not even really good. It's average, but it should be improved."
"The user interface should be improved."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"Icinga is a complex solution that's hard to learn. It's a powerful product for monitoring, but new users will have a hard time figuring out what to do."
"The tool currently fails to provide notifications to users."
"We would like the solution's customize and build functionality to be more user-friendly."
"Real user and UI monitoring are not practical."
"ManageEngine OpManager can improve by having better updates for critical issues."
"The storage level monitoring needs improvement. It needs storage level monitoring on the server itself. That feature is lacking right now."
"The initial setup is a bit complicated. It needs a technician who is very aware of the flow and how to officially set up the flow chart, etc."
"What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence. In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything. For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is." It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution."
"The main area for improvement for ManageEngine OpManager is its performance."
"We get a lot of false alerts."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Icinga is ranked 22nd in Network Monitoring Software with 17 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. Icinga is rated 7.6, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Icinga writes "A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and Nagios XI. See our Icinga vs. ManageEngine OpManager 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.