We performed a comparison between LogicMonitor and Nutanix Prism 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."
"LogicMonitor is good for getting a full view of your topologies. They have LiveMaps, which give you a visual representation of your infrastructure."
"The solution’s overall reporting capabilities are pretty powerful compared to ones that I have used previously. It seems like it has a lot of customizations that you can put in, but some of the out-of-the-box reports are useful too, like user logon duration and website latency. Those type of things have been helpful and don't require a lot of, if any, changes to get useful content out of them. They have also been pretty easy to implement and use."
"Having a full team at LogicMonitor for support is super helpful as they are available all the time to answer any questions you may have."
"The concept of developing a dashboard template for ourselves, then cloning it for every single customer, and only having to change one piece of information, is a godsend. That's one of the strengths. We can develop a template that fits every customer and just change the information that is presented."
"The plugins are easy to integrate, and LogicMonitor provides these add-ons for vendors like VMware. It becomes very easy to integrate them and take the data sources."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"The most valuable feature of LogicMonitor is the infrastructure monitoring capability."
"LogicMonitor saves time in terms of its ability to proxy a connection through a device. For example, if you are troubleshooting a device, which you may want to connect to, you can proxy this connection through the platform. As a support resource, I don't need to use multiple platforms to connect to a device to further investigate the issue. It is all consolidated. From that perspective, it saves time because a resource now only needs to use one platform."
"We were impressed with Nutanix, overall. Some of the other main drivers for our switch to it were the simplicity of setting up our Nutanix clusters, ease of management, and that their support is very respected. There is an overall ease of use, compared to VMware. I'm sold on their product."
"The solution's technical support is helpful and responsive."
"Nutanix has one of the greatest support organizations that I've ever had to use. They're polite, you get someone on the phone fast, and they always find a solution for you."
"The most valuable features are the dashboards."
"It's easy to spin up VMs and makes cluster maintenance easy, especially with the LCM (Life Cycle Manager) that is built-in. That helps do installs of AHV or even ESXi. You can also upgrade the AOS software that runs the Nutanix clusters. And you can upgrade the firmware, which is nice."
"I like the general usability for general configuration. It is sufficient for everyday operations."
"The ability to do snapshots is fantastic. It does a great job. Not only do snapshots work great, but you can take a snapshot on the fly. The snapshot takes a second to complete. You can then make a change and test it out to see if it works. If you have any problem, just roll it right back."
"Prism is easy to scale."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"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."
"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."
"LogicMonitor has good features, but the ease of use is a little bit confusing. Additionally, we are looking for workflow automation, which is a little bit tricky for LogicMonitor."
"LogicMonitor should improve its logging features. It can become expensive and should be cost-effective. It would be great to see prebuilt templates for alerting methods in LogicMonitor that are similar to the prebuilt dashboards. Currently, users have to build their alerting configurations."
"Their Logs feature is quite new. It is not as feature-rich as we would like it to be. There have been a couple of conversations internally around other log management tools, like Splunk, which may do more for us than LM Logs. The benefit of LogicMonitor is that our staff know how to use it, so we don't really want to move away from it, if we don't have to. I fully expect there to be more development in this area. It is their newest feature, so it is understandable that it hasn't evolved as some of the other stuff. It would be good to see a bit more development in this area, but I think the monitoring side of things is spot on."
"LogicMonitor's reporting capabilities definitely could use an improvement. We have made do with the dashboarding and done what we can to make that work for our customers. However, there are definitely customers who would like a PDF or some kind of report along those lines, where we have been utilizing other tools to provide them. The out-of-the-box LogicMonitor reporting is the only thing that we have been less than impressed with."
"The ease of use with data source tuning could be improved. That can get hairy quickly. When I reach out for help, it's usually around a data source or event source configuration. That can get challenging."
"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."
"Although this solution has very good analytics capabilities, it can be even more granular."
"The cost is a negative aspect."
"One problem I faced when creating a VM and adding a hard disk to is that Nutanix Prism did not allow me to reduce that VM's hard disk."
"Nutanix does not support all of the Linux distributions, so we have to use VMware in some cases."
"I would like to have some cluster management tools included."
"When we get a request from a user for a file-level recovery, there are self-recovery options, but they only work if the replication is available to that cluster locally... In VMware, we could restore a VM and attach the hard drive to any other server and copy the file easily. But that kind of facility is not available in AHV."
"The solution could be a bit more user-friendly. The dashboard and configuration should be much easier to use."
"There are no firewall policies."
LogicMonitor is ranked 17th in Network Monitoring Software with 24 reviews while Nutanix Prism is ranked 4th in Virtualization Management Tools with 56 reviews. LogicMonitor is rated 9.0, while Nutanix Prism is rated 8.8. 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 Nutanix Prism writes "Having a centralized platform for infrastructure information has helped us with capacity planning". LogicMonitor is most compared with SolarWinds NPM, ScienceLogic, Zabbix, SCOM and Auvik Network Management (ANM), whereas Nutanix Prism is most compared with Zabbix, VMware Aria Operations, Cisco UCS Manager, Nutanix Cloud Manager (NCM) and Veeam ONE. See our LogicMonitor vs. Nutanix Prism report.
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.