We performed a comparison between Azure Network Watcher and SCOM 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."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"It provides good visibility."
"We use the solution to monitor network services. It helps to capture any network issues."
"The most valuable feature of Azure Network Watcher is using the gateways with the connections. The monitoring is useful for the logs and application insights into the data. The traffic filtering issues when it comes to deploying those applications are helpful."
"What I like most about Azure Network Watcher is that it's focused more on the architecture. I also like that it has a packet capture feature that tells you how the packet travels and whether it's exiting Azure, etc."
"The solution is stable."
"The solution is good for monitoring device behavior."
"The most valuable features I have found are typology, visualization, and capture."
"I like the visibility."
"The stability has been great."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is the capability of using classes within your management pack development."
"This solution helps our application teams by allowing them to drill further into issues and perform a root cause analysis."
"They have great integration with the active directory."
"The monitoring features are the most valuable. We have seen a major benefit from that so far."
"We are able to do problem determination on runaway processes."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The initial setup and deployment could be improved to be simplified."
"The initial setup and initial learning curve could be improved to be easier."
"I still use Wireshark and Azure Network Watcher to get the required data. My team captures the traffic from Azure Network Watcher, downloads it, then imports that traffic into Wireshark to get more details on the number of hits and replies, for example. If you can do that on Azure Network Watcher and have Wireshark built-in, that would make Azure Network Watcher better. If Azure Network Watcher has that functionality where you won't need a third-party tool to get what you need, that would be helpful. I'm also expecting more from Azure Network Watcher. It's more complex than knowing how the IP flows from its source to the destination. The tool also needs more open-source features, such as having some built-in Wireshark that improves monitoring for customers. Sometimes, you encounter a VPN tunnel, network, or routing issue, but finding out more about the blockage is challenging. Is it one hundred percent an Azure issue? Is it a peer issue? You don't get complete information from Azure Network Watcher, so you must use other tools and depend on your strategies to resolve a specific issue. If more features could be added in the next release of Azure Network Watcher, specifically ones you can find on open-source tools, then that would be a plus point for the tool."
"Azure Network Watcher needs to have better documentation and it needs to capture information accurately."
"Lacks sufficient security features."
"The solution could improve by limiting the need to clarify the logs. When the clarification is minimized, it is better for everyone involved."
"I would like to see in the future if we can troubleshoot as a firewall because it is equipment as a network player and some diagnostics."
"Azure is good, however, the Fortinet GUI is more intuitive and I like it more than anything else."
"The solution’s initial setup is difficult."
"I would like more customized reports. People should have some customization option on the dashboards for whenever they put multiple lists into it. Beyond customizing the content, there should be the ability to customize the colors so that they can engage some priority and mark challenges separately."
"System Center just provided upgrade and update features for Windows clients, and Windows systems, and did not support Linux, Android, or iOS, and other operating systems. They need to provide better integration with other operating systems if they don't already."
"All of the areas of reporting are very bad and need to be improved."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
"SCOM needs to improve its usability."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
"The initial setup should be easier to complete."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
Azure Network Watcher is ranked 34th in Network Monitoring Software with 9 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. Azure Network Watcher is rated 7.8, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Azure Network Watcher writes "Helpful database security, good support, and beneficial cloud-native application firewall". 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". Azure Network Watcher is most compared with Microsoft Network Monitor, Nmap, PRTG Network Monitor, ThousandEyes and SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics. See our Azure Network Watcher vs. SCOM 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.