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 technical support is good."
"This has made the management of our environment easier."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"It is a very good solution. It has a good interface and is easy to use. On top of that, it is very reliable in terms of distribution as well as getting the report."
"The major features of this product are the reporting tools. The most valuable features are package deployment and application deployment. Security management is also good because any vulnerability will be identified, and you can fix it. It's the best tool because you never know what kind of client you will have. For example, you may have your offices in low bandwidth remote areas. But it's achievable because it accommodates the bandwidth that you have available. Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is an excellent reporting tool for your environment. If you want to know the details about the hardware configuration, software configuration, what is causing a problem, or when a new feature update comes in for Windows, even that goes on SCCM itself. A lot of deployment stuff."
"It is easy to install, and quick to deploy."
"This solution captures all the devices in our infrastructure."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"Power packs."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The power flow is great."
"The solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"It is very easy to configure because we are using an agent-less version. You can very quickly implement a collector for monitoring device servers."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"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."
"The tool's deployment can be cumbersome."
"I would like to see some improvements in WSUS and control of other, non-Microsoft, product updates."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"Our company would prefer not rebooting computers while people are using them. There seems to be no strategy behind it."
"The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux."
"The solution is a bit heavy on the sources such as RAM or CPU and the software needs to be a bit lighter."
"Microsoft should extend support for additional platforms."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
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, BigFix, Microsoft Intune 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.