We performed a comparison between ITRS Geneos and ManageEngine OpManager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"One of the most valuable features is that it can be configured by non-developers. It doesn't require development expertise to configure it."
"The solution's log monitoring and alerting mechanisms are very user-friendly and easy to plug and play."
"One of the best aspects of Geneos is that it has a broad scope and can cover a lot of use cases. You can write your own scripts to monitor really specific things. And the rules that you can put in place can be quite complex for the alerts."
"Real-time log monitoring with desktop alerts is valuable as it tells us immediately when there is an issue."
"The ability to build integrations to tools that are not monitored out of the box is the most valuable feature."
"I always appreciate Geneos's stability and ease of use."
"Geneos automatically sends email notifications when any batch job fails, the database is down or the website is down. It is automatically monitoring everything and reduces manual effort."
"The flexibility of the product is most valuable. It is highly customizable. If you put your mind to it and think of something you could do, there's a good possibility you can get it integrated within the console, if it's not readily available. The simplicity or ease of customization has been valuable."
"You can put all of your work on there, they'll send you an email or send you a text. That functionality as a network engineer is the one I like the most. I do like the fact that we can schedule reports. That works too because that's a lot fewer spreadsheets that I have to create."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to reach most of our network devices and get the most from them."
"The dashboard, versatility and larger horizon are valuable."
"This is a good general monitoring system that has all the features we require and they constantly update with new capabilities."
"The setup was easy."
"The solution offers very good integration capabilities."
"The solution gives pretty good network visibility. I am also impressed with it's monitoring."
"The solution is finely stable."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Much of the reporting outside of the user interface is very basic and requires much customization to be useful."
"For the solution to stay relevant in the cloud-based monitoring environment Geneos needs more plug-ins with more features. Instead of offering clients workarounds, the solution should have a cloud-based out-of-the-box version."
"I would also like to see suggested guidelines to accomplish a monitoring task. The issue is that ITRS is so flexible that there is more than one way to complete a task, each with benefits and disadvantages."
"Geneos' application monitoring could be improved a lot. Products like AppDynamics and Dynatrace provide the process thread-level monitoring, but Geneos lacks these capabilities."
"There is one drawback to using lightweight data collection: we lack the feature of observability based on time series, such as historical model data. This makes it difficult to view data in ITRS. ITRS needs to improve this feature."
"Sometimes, if there is a lot of data coming onto the servers, we have observed a little bit of slowness on the gateway servers which are doing the ITRS dashboard monitoring."
"One area where there is room for improvement is the log file. I would like to be able to do a pre-run on the log files. When you are testing log files for regular expressions, it would be good to be able to do a quick check up front on that side of things before you release that into production."
"One thing that could be improved in terms of rapid scaling would be more ability to clone aspects of an implementation. It seems like there are opportunities in this area, where we have repetitive tasks to do when it comes to implementing things on new servers or on new gateways. It would be great if there was an easy way to clone something that had already been done."
"Needs an OVA, or more support for virtual deployments. Building a virtual instance of OpManager and OpManager Probe was a bit difficult because there was no OVA available."
"We would like link monitoring included. At times we need to monitor those specific links closely."
"We get a lot of false alerts."
"ManageEngine OpManager can improve by having better updates for critical issues."
"We have been facing an issue since last year when a lot of our users started to work from home through their mobiles or computers. We are having trouble reaching these devices. We are now planning to publish our instance to the cloud so that we can reach these devices. Its performance should be improved in terms of the discovery of the devices. I would like to feel confident with the discovery that this solution does. For example, on my dashboard, I would like to be able to view a list of all devices seen on a specific server. At present, it is difficult to find such information. This would be an excellent feature to have."
"What I'd like ManageEngine OpManager to improve on is artificial intelligence. In particular, the machine learning feature should be integrated with the sensor flow. Doing this will give leverage, especially when you look at other products such as the Cisco DNA Center. When a switch goes down, I should be able to build on the correlation of other physical devices it's connected to so that I can integrate that with my CA CMDB. The ManageEngine OpManager team needs to draw a long-term roadmap where that feature becomes an integral part of the solution because right now, machine learning in ManageEngine OpManager is a long process. The solution doesn't have MLS search and I want to see ML being developed and applied for CA CMDB to greatly reduce the burden of tying everything. For example, if I have a data center switch that goes down now, I should know what server it's connected to, and when that switch goes down at twenty-four ports, I would get twenty-four alerts for different devices plugged in. I should be able to make a correlation that the major problem lies in the switch and not with the twenty-four elements connected to that switch. That is where machine learning should come into play and the ManageEngine OpManager AI should indicate "This is where the root of your problem is." It could be difficult, but this is a feature that should be improved or added to the solution."
"The licensing model is confusing."
"The storage level monitoring needs improvement. It needs storage level monitoring on the server itself. That feature is lacking right now."
ITRS Geneos is ranked 16th in Network Monitoring Software with 57 reviews while ManageEngine OpManager is ranked 15th in Network Monitoring Software with 44 reviews. ITRS Geneos is rated 8.2, while ManageEngine OpManager is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of ITRS Geneos writes "The flexible dashboard sets it apart from competing tools, but it's costly and lacks scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ManageEngine OpManager writes "Helps us monitor all the infrastructure in our company but UI monitoring is not practical". ITRS Geneos is most compared with Dynatrace, AppDynamics, Grafana, Prometheus and Datadog, whereas ManageEngine OpManager is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, SCOM and Nagios XI. See our ITRS Geneos vs. ManageEngine OpManager report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
