We performed a comparison between Avada Software Infrared360 and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."Monitoring that ties into our incident management system"
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"It's what we use for monitoring our MQ system, so the features that they provide are just really, really good."
"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."
"The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"This solution helps our application teams by allowing them to drill further into issues and perform a root cause analysis."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The product has helped our organization with in-depth monitoring."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"This solution saves us a lot of work because it reduces the effort that is required in order to start monitoring."
"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."
"We desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"I would like to see them improve their network monitoring."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
Earn 20 points
Avada Software Infrared360 is ranked 68th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability while SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 77 reviews. Avada Software Infrared360 is rated 8.8, while SCOM is rated 7.8. 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 SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". Avada Software Infrared360 is most compared with IBM MQ and Dynatrace, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and Nagios XI.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.