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"
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"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."
"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."
"We are able to do problem determination on runaway processes."
"The most valuable features in SCOM are Azure monitoring and integration with Azure Monitor for monitoring Azure-hosted servers from SCOM on-premises."
"It's easy to use."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"It is very good at monitoring Microsoft Server."
"SCOM's most valuable features are the network path feature, reporting, and integration with business intelligence."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"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."
"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."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"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."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
"The end-user components, including the dashboards, the administration console, and the web console, need to be improved."
"SCOM's feature that notifies us when a server is down is not present in recent updates, which has weakened the product."
"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.