We performed a comparison between BigPanda and Zenoss Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Alert aggregation was the primary requirement. BigPanda pulls all this together into a single UI for us, allowing us to see related alerts grouped together into an incident, and enables us to easily create a JIRA ticket and Slack channel to manage an issue."
"The program is very stable."
"BigPanda integrates well with other solutions, such as WatchGuard,"
"The best of a bad lot was the error message deduping."
"The main thing that we like about BigPanda is the user interface."
"The solution is user-friendly and has good performance and certification."
"A user-friendly solution."
"The most useful feature has been the AI/ML. The way BigPanda uses the AI/ML is good compared to other SRE tools."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"The most valuable feature is the flexible discovery mechanism."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"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."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"It's easy to use."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"BigPanda could improve by syncing its threshold settings with Dynatrace to align with users' familiarity."
"Lacks sufficient dashboard features."
"Analytics is an area for improvement, being able to break down the actions that are being taken by users of BigPanda, as well as the auto-magical work that is being done by BigPanda."
"Our infrastructure is quite large - tens of thousands of servers, often with 30-plus checks running on each host with one minute intervals. This generates a lot of data often in bursts (when we have a large scale failure). This has caused some delay in the ingestion pipeline."
"The usability needs to improve, because it is a pure code environment."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"We had to use a partner for the deployment."
"BigPanda can improve the correlations. We didn't see any big value. It is still good at the same event deduplication, event processing, and ticket creation, but I was more looking at event analysis and event correlation. In that area, it is still no big difference between the other solutions on the market. All of them, are in the same immature stage."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"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 AI aspect needs to improve."
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"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."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
BigPanda is ranked 40th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 12 reviews while Zenoss Cloud is ranked 46th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 8 reviews. BigPanda is rated 7.2, while Zenoss Cloud is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of BigPanda writes "Offers comprehensive alert monitoring and a user-friendly interface but requires manual validation to provide accurate alerts". 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". BigPanda is most compared with ServiceNow, Moogsoft, PagerDuty Operations Cloud, IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus and ServiceNow IT Operations Management, whereas Zenoss Cloud is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, ServiceNow IT Operations Management, Splunk Enterprise Security and ScienceLogic. See our BigPanda vs. Zenoss Cloud report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors and best AIOps vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure 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.
