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'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."
"It has role-based access to queues, giving us more insights into problems."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The solution is scalable. If you want to monitor more you have to buy more licenses, but you can add on. We don't plan to increase usage."
"It can send messages to our ticketing system."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"The solution is used for monitoring the hardware inventory. For instance, it helps with the whole operational monitoring view for the company's infrastructure."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"It works better than other products I’ve used – namely SolarWinds, which is cumbersome and error prone for web app monitoring. SCOM is not."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"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."
"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."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
"Direct integration with third-party tools, like ticketing systems, is lacking but would be beneficial."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"Of course, price is always an issue with Microsoft and could be improved."
"The price could 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.