We performed a comparison between SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor and Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) based on real PeerSpot user reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Google Cloud's operations suite is favored by users over SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor due to its scalability, stability, and user-friendly interface. The cloud logging feature and ability to access logs from various platforms are appreciated, but more metrics and tools for application logs are desired. Technical support is highly regarded, and setup is generally easy.
"We find the solution to be stable."
"Provides visibility into the performance uptime."
"The cloud login enables us to get our logs from the different platforms that we currently use."
"I like the monitoring feature."
"Our company has a corporate account for Google Cloud and so our systems and clusters integrate really well."
"The features that I have found most valuable are its graphs - if I need any statistics, in Kubernetes or Kong level or VPN level, I can quickly get the reports."
"The most valuable feature is the multi-cloud integration, where there is support for both GCP and AWS."
"Google's technical support is very good."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pros →
"The application dependency feature identifies issues between applications and servers or within the network where the application is hosted. It highlights related problems, whether related to packet processing or other issues, enabling the creation of alerts and reports accordingly."
"The most valuable feature is the Access Rights Manager."
"The solution can be deployed quickly."
"Management Console - Managing service to each server enrolled in the Solarwinds is much easier. Using a web base console, you can control your service much convenient way. There is no need to login remotely. It save a lot of time and effort."
"It's good at monitoring system-specific things like ports, services."
"The features like trends, capacity planning, recommendations, and diagnostics are the main items I focus on for added value."
"Monitoring of processes and services is the most valuable feature. It is not necessarily just the server alone in terms of the CPU or the memory. We can go in-depth into services and processes."
"The most valuable feature is application monitoring."
"The product provides minimal metrics that are insufficient."
"The logging functionality could be better."
"While we are satisfied with the overall performance, in certain cases we must add additional metrics and additional tools like Grafana and Dynatrace."
"This solution could be improved if it offered the ability to analyze charts, such as a solution like Kibana."
"Lacking sufficient operations documentation."
"It is difficult to estimate in advance how much something is going to cost."
"It could be even more automated."
"If I want to track any round-trip or breakdowns of my response times, I'm not able to get it. My request goes through various levels of the Google Cloud Platform (GCP) and comes back to my client machine. Suppose that my request has taken 10 seconds overall, so if I want to break it down, to see where the delay is happening within my architecture, I am not able to find that out using Stackdriver."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Cons →
"Some custom applications cannot be monitored, and a lot more applications need to be included."
"Solarwinds should come up the same monitoring system for other certificate expiration alert apart from SSL."
"The current script monitoring feature has limitations, especially when dealing with custom scripts."
"The tool’s report feature created issues for us. We needed to gain skills to use that feature. The tool’s customization is not easy since you have to reconfigure the whole system."
"I think they need to make reporting easier and more simple & dynamic."
"There is one feature that is a report writer. And they are currently trying to take it out from being a stand-alone application and integrating to the web. This doesn't give us the flexibility and it doesn't expand what we can get when it comes to reporting. So, putting it on the web is going to make it difficult to get some information. Leaving it where it is now will help us a lot."
"Mapping interactions between systems."
"An additional feature that would improve this solution is the ability to complete root cause analysis."
More Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is ranked 27th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 9 reviews while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is ranked 18th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 38 reviews. Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is rated 7.8, while SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) writes "Good logging and tracing but does need more profiling capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor writes "We use this product for base and application monitoring. ". Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) is most compared with AWS X-Ray, Datadog, Azure Monitor, Amazon CloudWatch and Grafana, whereas SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor is most compared with Azure Monitor, Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Prometheus and Nagios XI. See our Google Cloud's operations suite (formerly Stackdriver) vs. SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
