We compared SCOM and Zabbix based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
Based on the user reviews, SCOM is praised for its monitoring capabilities, ease of use, and seamless integration with Microsoft products. Users report positive experiences with SCOM's customer service, promptness, and efficiency. Meanwhile, Zabbix stands out for its robust performance, customization options, and customer service excellence. Users appreciate Zabbix's ability to monitor various parameters with ease and its user-friendly interface. However, users have suggested improvements in areas such as interface intuitiveness, documentation support, customization options, and integration capabilities.
Features: Based on user feedback, SCOM is praised for its robust monitoring capabilities, real-time alerts, seamless integration with other Microsoft products, and efficient troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, Zabbix stands out with its ease of monitoring and tracking various parameters, extensive customization options, and user-friendly dashboards facilitating data management and visualization. Overall, both products offer valuable features but with different strengths and focus areas.
Pricing and ROI: SCOM's setup cost has been found to be manageable and not requiring significant investments, according to user feedback. The licensing is straightforward and flexible, offering convenient usage. On the other hand, Zabbix offers a reasonably priced solution with a straightforward setup process. The licensing model is flexible and accommodating for different business needs., The feedback from users highlights the differences between SCOM and Zabbix in terms of return on investment (ROI). Users express satisfaction with Zabbix's performance, capabilities, and customization options, emphasizing its ability to monitor and analyze network and server performance, detect issues in real-time, and optimize resources for enhanced operational performance.
Room for Improvement: SCOM users have suggested enhancing the interface to be more intuitive, improving reporting capabilities, integrating with other software, and enhancing performance and stability. On the other hand, Zabbix could enhance its user interface, improve documentation for troubleshooting and setup, provide easier customization options, and better integration with external systems.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for SCOM indicate varying timeframes for deployment and setup, with some users taking three months for deployment and others taking a week for setup. However, one user mentioned taking a week for both deployment and setup. On the other hand, the reviews for Zabbix show some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others required a week for both. It is important to consider the context in which the terms are used., SCOM's customer service and support have received positive remarks, with users describing it as prompt, helpful, and knowledgeable. On the other hand, Zabbix's customer service and support are highly praised and regarded as excellent, with users appreciating their expertise and strong commitment to resolving issues efficiently.
The summary above is based on 34 interviews we conducted recently with SCOM and Zabbix users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"The most valuable features for us are the monitoring, the health explorer, and the console."
"The ease of deployment, especially on Windows platforms, is valuable."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is real-time alerts."
"This solution allows us to standardize all of the reports for monitoring the network, so it helps a lot for auditing purposes."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"It has good graphs of what is going on within the operating system."
"The features I found most valuable are the user interface and a wide range of network devices that are easy to configure."
"Health and communication links availability."
"The initial setup was not complex."
"The implementation process is very straightforward."
"Simple network monitoring that is easy to install and manage."
"The most valuable features of Zabbix are flexibility and a single interface for different types of monitoring."
"It has improved our server performance monitoring overall. We know right away when there are problems. It has built-in statistics, so we can go back and see if there's spiking. We can check what's happening every day around the same time and check the configuration to see if there's something that's running and needs to be fixed."
"The flexible licensing model is one of the solution's most valuable aspects. It really allows for great flexibility for companies."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"SCOM's feature that notifies us when a server is down is not present in recent updates, which has weakened the product."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
"Zabbix could improve when it comes to large-scale use cases. Additionally, the inventory could be better when connecting to other solutions, such as ServiceNow. There show to be better integration with other platforms and storage."
"They should open an SSH session from the web interface."
"Zabbix claims that there is an auto-discovery process but my team member was facing difficulty and was told that it's not really automatic, and there are some manual steps."
"Implementation is always tailored to the customer and the kind of information we need from the client to carry it out can make them very uncomfortable. Sometimes the clients are not ready to share it."
"The System Center Operations Manager can be improved."
"The server monitoring could be better."
"The main problem with Zabbix is that you have to spend time writing templates for all of the products that you have."
"Correlation of events would be a wonderful addition."
SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in Network Monitoring Software with 98 reviews. SCOM is rated 7.8, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios XI and Icinga. See our SCOM vs. Zabbix 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.