We performed a comparison between HashiCorp Terraform and SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It works pretty well for us."
"The conditional access policies that we set up are very useful."
"The features I found most valuable in Intune are its user visibility and troubleshooting options."
"Intune's feature that I have found most valuable is its auto-pilot feature."
"The most important thing for me is the autopilot feature."
"Intune enables us to manage our devices from anywhere."
"The ability to manage devices with different sets of policies is most valuable."
"We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product."
"The solution helps us save a lot of costs."
"It is the customization of Terraform's modules that I find most valuable."
"One of the most valuable features is that it offers the ability to create a VPC, Virtual Private Cloud and VPN connectivity to the VPC can be automated without having to do it manually."
"It is easy to recreate an exact duplicate or output of an environment."
"The most valuable aspect of this solution is the coding of our infrastructure. You can code it once and run it multiple times."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the modules it offers."
"HashiCorp Terraform is highly stable."
"It's very easy to automate functions on the cloud with HashiCorp Terraform. The commands are easy as well."
"The product’s alert feature is good. We receive notifications whenever some failures occur in the configuration."
"The most valuable feature of SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is version control. For example, if we began on the first of the month and we considered that as the configuration of the server, I could set that configuration as my baseline. On a daily basis, if there was the operations team that did, for example, server patching, the tool will maintain all levels of versions."
"Lacking ability to leverage more iOS device management internally."
"Reporting needs improvement."
"When Microsoft Intune is used with different android devices it does not always work as it is supposed to."
"An issue we have run into with Microsoft Endpoint Manager is that we cannot patch third-party products like Adobe and Chrome with it."
"There are a few security features that are not available in Microsoft Intune, when compared to other products."
"The reporting and cost have room for improvement."
"It would really be helpful to have the option to manage server operating systems as well, like Windows Server, at least. That way, we could scrap the use of SCCM, which requires a lot of on-premises infrastructure."
"Areas for improvement in Intune include expanding support beyond Samsung devices to accommodate other Android manufacturers like Redmi and Motorola."
"From a user's perspective, it would be great if a UI tool is made available in the open source version as well, but I don't think it may be introduced because of the high costs for it announced by HashiCorp in its licensed version...HashiCorp Terraform can improve backward compatibility."
"HashiCorp Terraform state management could be improved to be used efficiently with multi-users."
"Terraform doesn't support Artifactory as a backend."
"The product can integrate and utilize more services from different competitors. Currently, their commands are quite similar to Kubernetes, which we use in our CI/CD pipeline. Also, they should consider incorporating Windows command line, like PowerShell."
"On occasion, I have noticed a number of bugs in this solution that have needed to be fixed."
"The user interface could be easier for non-technical people."
"HashiCorp Terraform is an open-source tool that relies on external developers to create plugins to expand its capabilities. However, this approach can be problematic as not all plugins are created by professionals and some may have security vulnerabilities. In the case of GKE, Google has created a solid plugin, but for other services, one must search for plugins on the HashiCorp Terraform registry, which can be hit or miss, as many plugins are created by students or hobbyists, who may not continue to maintain or update them. This model of open-sourced plugins may not be the most reliable or secure way of expanding the tool's capabilities."
"With cloud providers always adding new resource types, there are certain resources that Terraform does not support. It would be great if it could support those resources as well."
"In a feature release, they could enhance the reporting. However, we have not evaluated this part of the solution extensively."
"The product’s support services and licensing models need improvement."
More SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
HashiCorp Terraform is ranked 7th in Configuration Management with 38 reviews while SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is ranked 17th in Configuration Management with 2 reviews. HashiCorp Terraform is rated 8.6, while SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of HashiCorp Terraform writes "Easy to use, technically strong, and great for multi-provider or multi-cloud environments". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor writes "Useful version control, high availability, and scales well". HashiCorp Terraform is most compared with Red Hat Satellite, SaltStack, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Spring Cloud, whereas SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is most compared with . See our HashiCorp Terraform vs. SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management 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.