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."The administration piece makes it very easy to do MQ administration. It gives us a lot more flexibility and capabilities."
"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."
"We have easily created use case testing harnesses for specific flows that incorporate various message types."
"It allows non-technical users to inspect their individual components within the total infrastructure without disturbing other components and without bothering the technical teams."
"SCOM has helped us to monitor all the VMs in our environment, especially the Windows servers."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"I like the historical reporting of observer metrics."
"Being able to make and customize management packs and send out notifications is very valuable."
"It works better than other products I’ve used – namely SolarWinds, which is cumbersome and error prone for web app monitoring. SCOM is not."
"The advantages of SCOM are that it is definitely user friendly and a more appropriate solution for what we need."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"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."
"The user interface could be sexier and more ergonomic. The competing products have similar problems."
"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 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."
"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 desire a dashboard that could accumulate BOQ lengths per tenant on one screen for all tenants."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
"The solution should be more user-friendly and offer a better user interface."
"Of course, price is always an issue with Microsoft and could be improved."
"Application monitoring must be improved."
"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."
"I would like to see them improve their network monitoring."
"In a future release, they should add email notification alerts."
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.