We performed a comparison between ManageEngine OpManager and Pandora FMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We find the networking aspect of this solution to be the most valuable."
"Device monitoring is a good tool of this solution."
"The solution gives pretty good network visibility. I am also impressed with it's monitoring."
"I liked Network Configuration Manager. They had some pretty decent features there, and they also had pretty good monitoring and alerts."
"Defining thresholds and other alerting criteria is fairly simple and would not require a lot of training. This is very useful if you are managing a large environment."
"We use the solution to monitor links. It also helps us to track servers and monitor logs."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities."
"The solution is scalable."
"The solution is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"Thanks to its flexibility, I have been able to adapt the tool to our servers and find out quickly how their console works."
"The most valuable features are auto-discovery and automatic detection of the network topology and network monitoring."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"The official forum is active enough to answer most of the high-end technical questions that you may have."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"They should add more features to URL monitoring."
"There are certain things that are not possible to do with Op Manager. It's a solution that still needs time to develop."
"We would like the solution's customize and build functionality to be more user-friendly."
"The licensing model is confusing."
"The licensing for this solution is not straightforward and should be improved."
"We get a lot of false alerts."
"We have been facing an issue since last year when a lot of our users started to work from home through their mobiles or computers. We are having trouble reaching these devices. We are now planning to publish our instance to the cloud so that we can reach these devices. Its performance should be improved in terms of the discovery of the devices. I would like to feel confident with the discovery that this solution does. For example, on my dashboard, I would like to be able to view a list of all devices seen on a specific server. At present, it is difficult to find such information. This would be an excellent feature to have."
"The solution's reports need to include the number of applications consumed."
"I find that this software is resource heavy, and demands a lot of processing capacity."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"An update to the Android app would be appreciated."
"Third-party integration should be improved for some commonly used products."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"Their support is good, but it is just online communication. It would be great to be able to just call someone and talk to them instead of always writing. It works well for me because I am a decent communicator in email, but some people might find it difficult to describe in a written fashion and communicate with them that way. There is a learning curve to the interface, but once you get used to it, it is actually very powerful. They have a lot of options, but people struggle with the interface. They've improved it though, and it is getting better. They need to keep improving the learning curve to help buy-in. I'm the guy that manages it, so I'm comfortable with it. They can refine the upgrade agents to be easier. They can also do more refinement in end-user usability because not everyone is strong technically, and people who aren't strong technically might be averse to the product, even though it has come a long way. It has a complete GUI and everything."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and Nagios XI, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our ManageEngine OpManager vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
