We performed a comparison between Apache Web Server and Zenoss Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Infrastructure solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's initial setup phase is straightforward."
"Most of the features I liked were related to the performance during peak hours."
"The open-source nature is one of its most significant advantages."
"It's very stable, and it hosts one of the biggest of many biggest web applications in the world."
"Its community is its most valuable feature. Solving problems is easier on Apache because so many people know this product."
"It is scalable."
"The best thing about Apache is that it is open-source, so implementing my platform on-premises is less expansive than other solutions."
"The most significant advantage is the ability to swiftly enable HTTPS services when my DNS is configured correctly."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"It's easy to use."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"It would be great if technical support for Apache were available in Iran. It is a very important need."
"A monitoring interface would be great for this product. The monitoring dashboards for Apache's models are not included in the basic installation. You can install the basic monitoring model, then connect this model to another monitoring system."
"So far, for us, everything is okay."
"For NGINX, I think it has NGINX Management Suite, which is GUI-based and allows you to manage your configuration via the user interface, but Apache fails to offer such capabilities to users."
"There is a security-related problem that depends on the web server's configuration."
"The interface has room for improvement."
"Lacks integration with some cloud solutions."
"By optimizing the infrastructure to allow the webserver to directly handle queries from memory—particularly by prioritizing the storage of queries in memory and processing them through the web server interface—I could potentially cut down the required instances from five hundred to two hundred."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"The AI aspect needs to improve."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
Apache Web Server is ranked 3rd in Application Infrastructure with 21 reviews while Zenoss Cloud is ranked 20th in Application Infrastructure with 8 reviews. Apache Web Server is rated 8.6, while Zenoss Cloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache Web Server writes "Has good security, speed and traffic handling features ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zenoss Cloud writes "Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features". Apache Web Server is most compared with IIS, NGINX Plus, IBM WebSphere Application Server, Microsoft .NET Framework and Zend PHP Engine, whereas Zenoss Cloud is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Splunk Enterprise Security and ScienceLogic. See our Apache Web Server vs. Zenoss Cloud report.
See our list of best Application Infrastructure vendors.
We monitor all Application Infrastructure 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.