We performed a comparison between eG Enterprise 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."
"Enormous capability to monitor Citrix environments."
"EG monitors all infrastructure elements (all OS, all database, storage, network, and web server) from a single console."
"User session details"
"The most important feature is the ability to design, then implement monitoring tests on the fly as we are adapting to different situations."
"It gives good insight into inside of what's going on with Exchange."
"The ability to see what the end user response is, so I can get a better understanding of what the end user is seeing when they connect to the Citrix servers."
"Its ability to monitor failures and to restart a Windows service when it fails."
"Some of the best features of eG are, in terms of APM, they have complete modules between application performance monitoring, server monitoring, and even storage and network-based monitoring. The UI is also quite good. They have some standard AI-based capabilities, even though it's not quite as advanced when compared to Dynatrace. eG has some good, basic APM capabilities."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"I like this solution a lot because it has a very large Hispanic community and the platform looks very friendly."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"Thanks to this software and to the work of the support team, we have everything under control."
"It is easy to create your own custom modules if you just know a little bit of scripting. If you have unique requirements, you can just make your own modules. You can even grab checks from other vendors. There are open-source checks for various things such as SMTP, etc. There is a long list of different ones from Nagios. You can just use them, and within seconds, you get yourself a check that is monitoring whatever you need. It is really flexible. I guess that's why they call it Pandora Flexible Monitoring System (FMS). It is reliable. It does the job, and it alerts. It is also surprisingly feature-rich. Our network guy just recently asked about a particular protocol to monitor the bandwidth on the network, which is not a common protocol. When I looked it up, and I found that they cover it. It is very mature for a not-so-known product."
"Features I have found most valuable with Pandora are the personalized metrics and the simplicity of data."
"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 technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"In terms of areas for improvement in eG Enterprise, we are now moving most of our services to the OpenShift platform, and we need a way to monitor even containerized services or any service deployed on OpenShift, but that feature is still not available in eG Enterprise, so it's not good enough for us."
"Back-end configuration is not easy to implement."
"I can understand why they designed the user interface (UI) the way they did, but sometimes in the management of the eG Manager, it can be a bit clunky."
"Dashboards are difficult to create, and not so useful."
"The solution needs to enhance the management dashboards."
"eG Enterprise's licensing could be cheaper. Even compared to Dynatrace, I think the price is quite expensive considering the APM functionalities, even though they have other benefits such as info monitoring."
"would like to see improvements in the alarm display console."
"The UI looks a little dated and could do with a refresh."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"Pandora FMS is relatively new, and the interface with the older version crashes at times. We have several different operating systems, such as Linux and Windows, and Pandora does not run as well in these."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"I sincerely believe that Pandora needs new ideas for functionality closer to advanced device security monitoring."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
eG Enterprise is ranked 52nd in Network Monitoring Software with 20 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 28th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. eG Enterprise is rated 8.2, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of eG Enterprise writes "Great visibility, easy to set up, and has very responsive technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". eG Enterprise is most compared with Grafana, ControlUp, Dynatrace, Zabbix and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, Wazuh, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and Centreon. See our Pandora FMS vs. eG Enterprise report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
