We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Oracle Enterprise Manager 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 solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature is the graphical-based reports of software updates that have been successful, the ones that have failed, and a summary of where the failures are what security breaches may occur."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability."
"We are happy with the collaboration of SCCM with Patch My PC, which allows us to do patch work."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"The ability to make collections and deploy to them has been great."
"The product is very stable compared to older versions."
"The most valuable features of Oracle Enterprise Manager are the data guide and online monitoring."
"I mostly use the top events, and look at how the execution is happening on the database; and monitoring the cluster level rates. I even look at the execution plan."
"The most valuable feature is high availability."
"I have found the singular GUI feature very helpful. Fewer DBA resources can be allocated with Toad licenses."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a very user-friendly tool."
"We can manage everything in our environment."
"Oracle Enterprise Manager has eased the responsibilities among our DBAs. We can now assign individual tasks to separate DBAs."
"The tried and tested services that Oracle provides is second to none."
"Cloud-based improvements need to be better managed."
"Based on my experience with SCCM 2016, the main, big issue is not having a good user-friendly environment. It needs much better GUI."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"It is a bit of an old and outdated product."
"A lot of experience is needed in terms of troubleshooting, as this is one of the most difficult tasks in MECM. We were seven people in a group and I was the only one that had the patience to do the troubleshooting at times."
"The solution can be improved with the addition of a mobile device manager."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"On some hardware, we'd like an easier way to get peripherals attached."
"Patching. It's extremely difficult to determine what requires patching and the process to patch each component is slightly different."
"They should improve the hover text context. This would provide assistance whenever a task is attempted by a DBA."
"The interface could be more friendly for basic users."
"Better mobile access would be useful."
"Technical support could be more responsive."
"RMAN tools need improvement."
"Technical support could be faster."
"The product must improve its support team."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while Oracle Enterprise Manager is ranked 4th in Server Monitoring with 123 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Oracle Enterprise Manager is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Oracle Enterprise Manager writes "Provides good stability and has an easy implementation process". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Oracle Enterprise Manager is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Quest Spotlight, AppDynamics and PRTG Network Monitor. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Oracle Enterprise Manager 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.