BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. PRTG Network Monitor

As of May 2019, BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 18th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 8 reviews vs PRTG Network Monitor which is ranked 2nd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 28 reviews. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Operations Management writes "Enables us to proactively service our customers and even warn them about problems before they occur". The top reviewer of PRTG Network Monitor writes "Tells me when things are about to fall over, allowing me to preempt, preventing downtime". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with Splunk, AppDynamics and Dynatrace. PRTG Network Monitor is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix and ManageEngine OpManager. See our BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. PRTG Network Monitor report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. PRTG Network Monitor and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
I find the product's scalability to be one of the most valuable features since it allows us to add unlimited devices for monitoring and to set up additional polling servers without additional license cost or downtime in our monitoring.The product is available in ISO image format, ready for deployment. Centreon also has a comprehensive guide and documentation that are simple and easy to follow.The most important feature is that it permits us to receive alarms if there is an incident within the infrastructure. The feature I love the most is the reporting feature, the MBI (Monitoring Business Intelligence) which permits us to send advanced reports to our customers in PDF format or in Doc format. We also deploy Centreon Map which gives our customers intuitive views of their information system.We are alerted on service impacts and not when something is down. We have saved a lot of time on non-business-hours intervention.What I like most about Centreon is that it is very flexible and customizable, based on the user and/or business needs. Centreon is very flexible when it comes to monitoring parameters. We can use scripts found on the internet or scripts created by our infra/apps team. Also, the data visualization features are very simple and straightforward, yet very informative.What we like about it is that, whereas with Nagios, by design, if you have five or six data centers, you have to open five or six web pages to see what's going on, In Centreon, this is all included in one page, a single site, one dashboard. You don't have to jump from one specific dashboard to the other.I really like the filtering capabilities of it. You can easily tell what's critical next to what's okay, the state of the services. It's very easy to get the whole picture quickly.E-mail alert notifications are valuable.

Read more »

The fact that they have a very integrated relationship with Sentry Software, the Knowledge Module, is valuable... The richest feature for us is the number of Knowledge Modules that we can load into the product to add breadth of service to the customer. It enables us to move up the operational stack from hardware, to operating system, to application, and to cloud... That enables us to provide one pane of glass over all those layers - hardware, OS, app, and cloud.Valuable features include wide support for monitoring, strong event management, service management capability, baselining (analytics) and easy to integrate other tools with it.It provides common administration, and a Single Sign-On Platform with RBAC, which eases the cross launch between multiple toolsThe tailoring of the knowledge modules has been particularly useful as I can streamline the agents to only report on critical events.It is very helpful to be able to apply rule-based routing to alerts.TSOM's ability to consolidate alerts into a single location and provide filtering of alerts is great.It has provided us with a single location to host all events to be viewed/monitored by our NOC. This has greatly helped them to streamline their processes.It allows our operations team to have one single application to reference when investigating issues in our environment.

Read more »

It is a central solution in terms of how to actually use it. It has a very easy dashboard. Everything is concise. We are able to create custom sensors. For different parts of the business, we have many products across many environments, and it works for everything.We can see trends for a lot of different things, such as hard drive space and bandwidth usage. We can see and plan for the future by knowing, "We're sort of at 75% capacity now. In three months time, we know we're going to be up to 90%,so we need to plan ahead for it, getting upgrades booked in place." Since things like this take time and effort, it's handy to see trends into the future of where our company is going.The solution provides us with needed feedback on our IT infrastructure. It gives us really good quality of service when it comes to monitoring of available space and available resources. It allows us to preempt issues before they become a problem for the business.It is easy to use and intuitive, which is really important. It does what it says on the box by giving you a visual of the state of what is going on at any one time.It is pretty simple to use, which is always a good thing. It's been very reliable in updating us if any issues crop up.We use the remote probes a lot for our branch offices. Instead of deploying the full instance of PRTG, we'll put a remote probe out there. This simplifies the whole deployment for us.There is a simplicity to setting up the extra sensors. It's really easy for us to build infrastructure and start monitoring very quickly.The technical support seems to be quick, clever, and has a comprehensive knowledge base online, which is fantastic.

Read more »

Cons
The Home view could be improved by adding customization functions that allow users to change the size of the widgets for a more uniform layout.Centreon technical support is only available during Central European business hours. When it comes to critical business solutions, there should be a 24/7 hotline that customers can rely on.I would like to see a better UI, one which is more responsive.The most important issue is the capability to interconnect with other systems. It already exists for some of them. For example, the Stream Connector is something we use to populate data in another system. This kind of facility for connecting should exist for all products that it makes sense to have connected to a monitoring solution.Centreon needs to improve the granularity of the data as well as the graphical data. It would also be better to if there was improvement to the filtering/grouping system as well as the creation of views.There are improvements that they need to make to their API. When we're using different systems and we want to disable monitoring for a specific server, we still can't do that through the API. That's something that's lacking.This solution lacks service monitoring in the cloud.It is necessary to improve service monitoring of database services in the free version.

Read more »

Reporting would be an area for improvement in TrueSight... We have almost 800 customers today on TrueSight and just under 10,000 assets. We need to be able to give a customer some information. If the customer's product fails, they'll ask us, "Did it have a problem beforehand?" We have all those events and we know all the problems it had beforehand. We have to be able to give them access to that kind of reporting. That's an enhancement that we need.Deployment requires lots of resources (servers). It has too many consoles.The knowledge modules could be more lightweight in size. At present, the installation packages can be quite large.BMC's solutions for cloud monitoring (monitoring of AWS and Azure resources) are very poor in stability and customization.BMC's online documentation is often incorrect or incomplete.I would really like to see out-of-the-box support for monitoring uninterruptible power supplies.More modules for less popular applications and better documentation.I think the ease of deployment needs to be looked at. It would be great if the deployment was faster and easier.

Read more »

With custom sensors, there is a lot of work which needs to be done in the background, just for it to be tailor-made for the specific thing that we are actually monitoring. We take a lot of time with the custom sensors. I would like to see the customer sensor be more robust and a bit more varied.The only sort of limitation is the actual probes. So, if you don't have enough probes on there, you can over flip them and cause the WMI sensors and SNMP sensors to sort of overload. Sometimes, they might timeout for a minute, but they do come back.The desktop app is the one area where it do with some improvement. From a user's perspective, I would like to be able to get more out of the desktop app as opposed to where we are now with it.While the desktop app is good, they could slightly improve it. We would like it to be a single pane of glass. At the moment, you can only see certain portions of information. You have to scroll through to make it more granular. We want them to develop the desktop app to be more user-friendly.Once you start going above 5000 sensors, things do start to get a bit shaky. There are some best practice out there that you will need to adopt and be aware of.We would like more cloud native sensors for AWS, Azure, Google Cloud, etc. A lot of businesses are moving in that direction, so having something where we can pull performance stats out of these cloud services would be great for us.The thing that we do struggle with a bit is in the historic data. If I want look over 30 days, because it averages out onto one graph, you can't zoom in and drill down information.We run it in a cluster, so we have two that run together. The cluster behind it is sketchy at times.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
Open-source solutions like this can be very cost effective for an organization looking for a product that they can quickly implement, as there is no initial cost and there are no license renewal fees. However, it is important to take into consideration some of the related costs that may come along as needed, such as training, support, and product enhancements.The solution is very effective, despite the low price.I think Centreon's pricing is fair, especially given the criticality of our system. They were cheaper than the other solutions. The licensing terms were pretty straightforward. I believe it was based on the number of hosts.The pricing is acceptable.They only sell four hour slots for support, so if you have just one question, then you need to pay for four hours. Or, you need to wait until you have enough questions to fill those four hours. They are not flexible in this.For more complex tasks, we use prepaid support days and ask Centreon to come onsite.Centreon is an open source product. Thus, there is no need for licensing.It's quite expensive when you use the Enterprise version, but if you compare it to other providers, it's more like a middle-of-the-line product. It's always good to have a price that is lower, but I would say the price is okay because we get very good support and if we have any other issues we can always contact them. There has never been a time when I didn't get help from them.

Read more »

We pay license fees of between $150 and $200 per asset. There is an enterprise software license fee, and then you pay a percentage for your maintenance, and then Premier Support. For example, if you buy a two-year license for the product, then the maintenance fee is added to that for two years at X percent a year. Then there's a small fee on top of that for Premier Support...Pricing is very high.The solutions are not the cheapest but are robust and stable. License model is rather complex and BMC do often change the model.

Read more »

We used a product called SolarWinds in the past, and its cost was high. Whereas, PRTG came in at a third of SolarWind's cost.Cost was a factor when selecting this solution, but it just did everything we wanted it to do.Our licensing costs are 10,000 euros over three years.We looked at PRTG and SolarWinds. From a cost side perspective, compared to PRTG, and from what you get back from it, PRTG was sort of a hands down the winner.While I am not the person who deals with pricing, I would say that we pay around 1000 pounds a year.It is about £4,500 for the first year, then about another 15 to 20 percent annually after that. So, we are looking at about £1000 running costs a year. When you think about how much an outage costs per minute, it's negligible.If you are not too sure about it, try the free version. Then, if you like it, you can go to the paid version and roll it out.In my company now, we are using the free version.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Top Comparisons
Compared 37% of the time.
Compared 24% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 15% of the time.
Also Known As
ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations ManagementPRTG
Learn
Centreon
BMC
Paessler AG
Overview
The Centreon solution, based on a free to download Open Source Platform, monitors all critical IT Infrastructure and Applications with real-time dashboards, analytics and insightful alerts that prevent business-impacting downtimes. Since 2005, over 200,000 IT professionals from SMBs and Fortune 500 companies rely on Centreon to guarantee their organization operational performance.

The BMCProactiveNet Performance Management Suite is made up of a number of essential components that will allow end-users to proactively manage their physical,virtual and cloud environments.

By combining capacity and performance analytics, ProactiveNet aligns IT enterprise and cloud systems to business demands, ultimately creating more intelligent and proactive business processes. ProactiveNet allows business needs and demands to be the driver of the IT system, and not the other way round, with the result being optimized resources, reduced risks and costs, and higher performance levels within the business.

PRTG Network Monitor runs on a Windows machine within your network, collecting various statistics from the machines, software, and devices which you designate. PRTG comes with an easy-to-use web interface with point-and-click configuration. You can easily share data from it with non-technical colleagues and customers, including via live graphs and custom reports. This will let you plan for network expansion, see what applications are using most of your connection, and make sure that no one is hogging the entire network just to torrent videos.
Offer
Learn more about Centreon
Learn more about BMC TrueSight Operations Management
Get Started Today

Download and install PRTG for free

Sample Customers
Airbus, Bollore, BT, Canal Plus, Kuehne Nagel, Limagrain, LVMH, Oberthur Technologies, Orange, Darty, Addax Petroleum, Plastic Omnium, Auchan, Valeo, Saint Gobin, Clarins, Hugo Boss, JC Decaux, French Government (Defense, Justice, Environment, Agriculture), OptiComm, Thales, Zeiss. Bank of East Asia and China E-Port. Jameson Bank, Sidnix, RungeICT, MedicalAnimal, Truck-lite, GamingGrids, The Covell Group, Forsythn County Schools, NetMass, Musgrove Park Hospital, Lanes Health, Columbia Southern University, Vodafone, Intrust Bank
Top Industries
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider19%
Financial Services Firm17%
Energy/Utilities Company16%
Logistics Company14%
No Data Available
REVIEWERS
Financial Services Firm14%
Comms Service Provider14%
Construction Company9%
Legal Firm5%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm15%
Pharma/Biotech Company10%
Comms Service Provider10%
Energy/Utilities Company8%
Find out what your peers are saying about BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. PRTG Network Monitor and other solutions. Updated: May 2019.
341,120 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.

Sign Up with Email