We performed a comparison between ManageEngine Applications Manager and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Datadog, Dynatrace, New Relic and others in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability."ManageEngine Applications Manager's installation is pretty easy."
"What I like most about ManageEngine Applications Manager is its price point, apart from its technicalities. The solution is cheaper than its competitors. ManageEngine Applications Manager has helpful documentation that makes setting it up straightforward."
"ITSM is a valuable feature, it complies with the requirements in Pakistan."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to be able to monitor Kubernetes."
"Its price and the flexibility to deploy are the most valuable. Flexibility is very important, and you can scale from very basic to more complex. This solution is a part of a complete suite of management tools. So, it can be integrated with other solutions for monitoring networks, which is very important. You can expand it or interconnect it with many other tools, which is a powerful feature. We have a very good and long relationship with ManageEngine support guys. They provide very good support for us."
"We do not have pricing constraints as an organization, because we do have reservations about ManageEngine being functionally scalable."
"ManageEngine Applications Manager maintains the historical data and it's easy for us to analyze the trends and patterns and fix them accordingly."
"The feature that I have found most valuable in ManageEngine Applications Manager is its dashboard."
"The most valuable features in SCOM are Azure monitoring and integration with Azure Monitor for monitoring Azure-hosted servers from SCOM on-premises."
"It is very good at monitoring Microsoft Server."
"I like the historical reporting of observer metrics."
"It works better than other products I’ve used – namely SolarWinds, which is cumbersome and error prone for web app monitoring. SCOM is not."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"The most valuable feature is the extensibility, as there are really no limits as to what you can do with it."
"The agent often crashes when there is too much load on the application side. If a sudden storm of data comes in, the agent crashes down most of the time."
"The problem is that implementation requires a significant amount of mapping effort."
"Lacks an SIEM solution which can be found in other products."
"One area of improvement is the dashboard should be more readable and available."
"Even with the top-notch dashboard, it could be made stronger in order to have an additional plug-in for analytics."
"They can improve the post-processing of the data. AppDynamics has more powerful tools for post-processing or analytics. It has some limitations in more complex environments, but because we are free to use different solutions, we try to find what is best for the customers or the problem we are trying to solve."
"The dashboards in the interface need a lot of work."
"The information provided by ManageEngine is not deep-dive like IBM and CA provide."
"It could use some system enhancements, such as better dashboards."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
"It lacks certain details that other products do better, like granular access and better application monitoring."
"They can focus more on cloud monitoring instead of on-premise monitoring. We should be able to monitor cloud-related applications. They can include this feature in the next release. If it is in the cloud, we can have scalability by using Kubernetes. The container is containerized, packaged, and managed using Kubernetes. This feature is not there in SCOM. Going forward, if they can focus on that, it will be great."
"I would like to see more standard libraries for the market solutions, out of the box, that you don't need to do a lot of work on."
"The dashboard features are not user-friendly for our management team, only for the technical department."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"SCOM's feature that notifies us when a server is down is not present in recent updates, which has weakened the product."
More ManageEngine Applications Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine Applications Manager is ranked 34th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 15 reviews while SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 77 reviews. ManageEngine Applications Manager is rated 7.6, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of ManageEngine Applications Manager writes "Though it is a useful tool for the modernization and monitoring of applications, it lacks in providing stability and scalability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". ManageEngine Applications Manager is most compared with AppDynamics, Dynatrace, Grafana and SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and Nagios XI.
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.
