We performed a comparison between LogicMonitor 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."Another feature from the technical aspect, the back-end, is the ability to allow individual users or customers to have their own APIs. They're able to make changes using the plugins covered by LogicMonitor. That is a very powerful feature that is more attractive to our techno-savvy customers."
"I really appreciate the reporting function because it allows me to create dashboards that will be emailed to me during the morning so that I have a complete overview of my client's health, within a specific time frame."
"LogicMonitor added AI technology to help understand what's normal and that has helped quite a bit, so that's the feature I found most valuable in the product. The product is also doing quite well with identifying devices and customizing a particular Cisco version or model number. LogicMonitor continues to be active in updating what is available to be monitored, and it's been very good with keeping those things current, so that's another valuable feature of the product."
"It has improved our organization with its capacity planning. We have a performance environment that we use to benchmark our applications. We use it to say, "Okay, at a certain level of concurrency, we know where our application will fall over." Therefore, we are using LogicMonitor dashboards to tell us that we're good. Our platform can handle X number of clients concurrently hitting us at a time."
"It is easy to set up and monitor an entire facility. This is crucial because we have around 80 facilities that require monitoring. LifePoint is a hub-and-spoke environment, so it is essential to understand all of the WAN interfaces."
"The most valuable feature is the visualization of the data that it is collecting. I have used many products in the past and they tend to roll up the data. So, if you're looking at data over long periods of time, they start averaging the data, which can skew the figures that you're looking at. With LogicMonitor, they have the raw data there for two years, if you are an enterprise customer. If you are looking at that long duration of data, you're seeing exactly what happened during that time."
"We only have one monitoring tool, and that is LogicMonitor. It does pretty much everything we need under one roof. They are very good at rapidly releasing new features. It's not like we have to wait six months or a year between new features and data sources. There is very quick development. If there is something that doesn't do it for us, I know I can just raise it with support or our delivery representative, and there is a good chance that that will be looked at. If it's not too much effort, we will see it released in the next few months. So, the solution is very good from that perspective. We have everything in LogicMonitor."
"LogicMonitor is good for getting a full view of your topologies. They have LiveMaps, which give you a visual representation of your infrastructure."
"The RFS portion of the solution is the product's most valuable feature."
"You can develop your own apps within Loom, and they can be configured very simply."
"The solution is absolutely scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out they definitely can."
"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."
"The topology mapping is all based on the dynamic discovery of devices that could talk to each other. There is no real manual way that you can set up a join between two devices to say, "This is how this network is actually set up." For example, if you have a device, and you're only pinning that device and not getting any real intelligent information from it, then it can't appear on the map with other devices. Or if it can appear, then it won't show you which devices are actually joined to it."
"There is a lack of automation, especially in terms of remediating problems. The problem is seen and identified, but there is a need and a gap where LogicMonitor can help us automate the remediation of the problem."
"The process of upgrading some of the collectors has been a little bit confusing. I need to understand that better."
"There are some very specific things that need improvement in LogicMonitor. One is the lack of formatting for customized alerts, particularly the delivery of them to our email channel. We'd also like to see further customization of dashboards. Finally, something that is specific to us as an MSP that uses LogicMonitor, is white-labeling or skinning of the product, so we can make it look more customer-focused for our customers."
"Dashboarding capabilities could be enhanced. It is cumbersome, you must do it all at once, and then you must repeat the process every now and then."
"One thing I would like to see is parent/child relationships and the ability to build a "suppression parent/child." For example, If I know that a top gateway is offline and I can't talk to it anymore, and anything that's connected below it or to it is also going to be offline, there is no need to alarm on those. In that situation it should create one ticket or one alarm for the parent. I know they're working towards that with their mapping technology, but it's not quite to that level where you can build out alarm logic or a correlation logic like that."
"It needs better access for customizing and adding monitoring from the repository. That would be helpful. It seems like you have to search through the forums to figure out what specific pieces you need to get in for specific monitoring, if it's a nonstandard piece of equipment or process. You have to hunt and find certain elements to get them in place. If they could make it a bit easier rather having to find the right six-digit code to put in so it implements, that would be helpful."
"Role-based permissions could be better and updating modules could be smoother."
"The reporting is a bit weak. They should work to improve this aspect of the product."
"The change management within the solution needs to be improved. There needs to be more process automation."
"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 discovery and mapping still takes a lot of human intervention, it's quite resource heavy,"
LogicMonitor is ranked 15th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 25 reviews while Loom Systems is ranked 56th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 4 reviews. LogicMonitor is rated 9.0, while Loom Systems is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of LogicMonitor writes "We went from nothing to full visibility across our internal and external estates of equipment". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Loom Systems writes "Simple and very effective for developing and configuring apps with great integration capabilities". LogicMonitor is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, ScienceLogic, Zabbix, SCOM and OpsRamp, 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.
