We performed a comparison between Avada Software Infrared360 and Oracle Enterprise Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Microsoft, ServiceNow and others in Server Monitoring."It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"Some of the most valuable features are its real-time performance view/dashboard, metric history, real-time monitoring and alerts, as well as quick access to Oracle's tuning and diagnostic options."
"The most valuable features are security and speed."
"I think the look and feel and the accessibility to the databases, the scale of environment support."
"Oracle Enterprise Manager is a scalable solution."
"This solution allows us to quickly drill down when there are issues."
"It's a useful feature to be able to see the top SQL, the number of executions, the CPU, and the resources that it's using."
"Due to the infrastructure's size, the introduction they offer is very, very useful. It helps with an overall understanding of the product."
"I have found the singular GUI feature very helpful. Fewer DBA resources can be allocated with Toad licenses."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"The UI can be cumbersome - but we are still using the Viper interface and we have not had the time to check out the Alloy interface which is supposed to be much improved."
"One area where they could improve is with their documentation. Some sections are not up to date with new release information and providing additional samples in some areas would be very helpful."
"Some of the graphics in the interface could be improved. It's pretty basic. Some interfaces are not up to what you're used to seeing on other, more Windows-like tools."
"We are still working with the FTE/MFT subscription monitoring and reporting functionality. That is an area in which we would like to see further development taking place."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"The interface offered by Oracle Enterprise Manager has certain shortcomings and needs improvement to become a nice tool."
"Technical support could be faster."
"The tool is expensive."
"In my experience, the monitoring could be improved."
"The interface could be more friendly for basic users."
"RMAN tools need improvement."
"I would like to improve the cost."
"The deployment is not straightforward."
Earn 20 points
Avada Software Infrared360 is ranked 36th in Server Monitoring while Oracle Enterprise Manager is ranked 4th in Server Monitoring with 122 reviews. Avada Software Infrared360 is rated 8.8, while Oracle Enterprise Manager is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Avada Software Infrared360 writes "An offsite team performs a daily infrastructure health check and sends reports to the technical/management teams. ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Enterprise Manager writes "Provides good stability and has an easy implementation process". Avada Software Infrared360 is most compared with IBM MQ and Dynatrace, whereas Oracle Enterprise Manager is most compared with Zabbix, Quest Spotlight, Dynatrace, Quest Foglight for Databases and AppDynamics.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server Monitoring 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.