We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and ScienceLogic based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to make collections and deploy to them has been great."
"It is a good choice for deployment that performs very well."
"The ease of usability is the most valuable feature. It's user-friendly."
"I manage software updates and operating systems for devices, and within seconds, we can remotely deploy a system for, say, 2,000 devices. Not only that, but we can also deploy scripts and create comprehensive compliance rules."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"It does the job and meets our needs. With everybody working remotely these days, we are using this solution to deploy everything. The deployment of PCs is easy."
"It works well for the endpoints for the customer I'm consulting. It has a bunch of knobs, and you can tune it to do lots of things."
"It has the ability to perform mass distribution."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"Power packs."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"One of the valuable features is rapid dashboards."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"The downside of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's an on-premise-based solution. With the pandemic coming on board the need to support users across the globe has increased. For a while, we would use the in-built Microsoft Teams screen sharing feature but the disadvantage of that is you cannot perform privileged access. Microsoft does not give you access to that. That's where you need cloud-based tools, such as BeyondTrust or Freshservice."
"SCCM can improve on third-party application support."
"The solution is on-premises. The cloud version of the product, if a person needs to be on the cloud, would be InTune, which already exists as an option. SCCM doesn't need to offer cloud features for this reason."
"The solution is a bit heavy on the sources such as RAM or CPU and the software needs to be a bit lighter."
"The tool's deployment can be cumbersome."
"Regarding this, I'd like to mention the agent situation. When the agent on an end-user device is not functioning correctly, it can be quite problematic. It would be highly beneficial if there were a self-healing mechanism in place. Essentially, if the agent becomes corrupted or encounters issues, it should be able to rectify itself autonomously. This is particularly critical because, in order to utilize a tool like MECM (assuming you're referring to Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager), we need to deploy agents, known as AsMs, on all the devices we use, such as Windows 10 or Windows Server. Sometimes, when we deploy configurations or updates, they don't apply properly due to agent issues. This issue has been present since we began using MECM around 23 years ago. Unfortunately, there is currently no built-in mechanism for the agent to detect its own problems and initiate self-repair. Microsoft doesn’t have any feature to scan vulnerabilities and hence, they could include those."
"The setup was complex and I faced a lot of problems initially because I was new to the solution."
"Initial setup was complex. There's a lot that goes into it."
"Addressing duplicate IPs: There is the ability to edit the DB and fix this, but adding some logic to understand them would be a plus."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"I would like to see out-of-the-box standard dashboards for common services."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
"The product must educate its strategic partners for deployment."
"They need a little more self-service."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 6th in Server Monitoring with 42 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server Monitoring 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.
