We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and Loom Systems based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring."The hardware is very powerful and it is a stable solution."
"I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"The flexibility and the ease in which the features can be expanded are the solution's most valuable aspects."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"Ease of management is certainly the most valuable feature in this product."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"The solution is highly scalable, mainly because of the templates that make it easy for you to actually edit on the system."
"I can quickly manage the provisioned servers."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"What I like best about Loom Systems is that you can use it for infrastructure monitoring. I also like that it's a flexible solution."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"The pricing can be better."
"Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"Getting a CLI report on routers, switches, or any other CLI configuration device is difficult."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"What's lacking in Loom Systems is the level of priority for each incident. For example, after implementation and there was a huge impact on the client, and the client comes back to you and says that there's an incident, that there needs to be an immediate resolution for it, you'll see severity one, severity two, etc., in Loom Systems, rather than priority levels. It would be better if the incidents can be defined as low priority, medium priority, or high priority."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"The discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 31st in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 20 reviews while Loom Systems is ranked 55th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while Loom Systems is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Stable and resilient, but slightly more complicated to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, Zabbix, Datadog and HPE OneView, whereas Loom Systems is most compared with Elastic Search and Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.