We performed a comparison between OpenText Operations Bridge and SCOM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Event Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I've found the solution to be very scalable."
"It allows us to build dashboards for individual parts of the business. Our team members appreciate that they can just get a view of their part of the world without having to worry about anyone else's."
"I find the Micro Focus Operations Bridge dashboard valuable, including its instrument analysis and anomaly control features that help indicate root causes and problems with your infrastructure."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not complex at all."
"The Performance Manager provides great insight into our systems' performance."
"The preloaded rules and ways to monitor your systems are a must."
"It's a very good product overall."
"The integration with the ticketing tool makes sure that there is a record for every issue."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"Because it's Windows-based, it actually reports quite well. It reports everything you can think of on the Windows server and allows you to monitor anything. It's excellent for those in the Windows world as it's very good at it."
"The advantages of SCOM are that it is definitely user friendly and a more appropriate solution for what we need."
"This solution helps our application teams by allowing them to drill further into issues and perform a root cause analysis."
"It can send messages to our ticketing system."
"SCOM has helped us to monitor all the VMs in our environment, especially the Windows servers."
"The solution's reporting engine has given me detailed information on which applications or services I've either failed or about to fail in terms of the predictive makeup on Azure cloud."
"The deployment of agents on new CI should be improved. There should be some kind of automation to directly deploy them from the console. It can maybe have some more AI functions because most of the other tools are going in that direction."
"The pricing is a bit expensive for smaller companies."
"Installing and upgrading the HPOM and Operations Agent software is not always easy and the process can be quite fragile. Once it is running, it is very quick and stable, but an upgrade can quite easily break something or terminate unexpectedly."
"I'm not aware of areas that need improvement."
"The service takes a very long time to start and it requires a lot of resources."
"Our issues are largely support related due to where we are and the knowledge base that we have here. This issue relates both HPE in general and to the technical products."
"Remove the dependency of Java technology. This is a feature used for admin purposes to update the modeling."
"We are waiting for quicker release cycles. Also containerized upgrade, so that you don't have to bring a system entirely down to make a minor upgrade, in fact, or a minor patch."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"We didn't know the solution enough, and therefore, it took a while to set everything up correctly. There was a learning curve."
"In terms of features that could be improved, I would say the agent integration into the operating system. We are having difficulties integrating Linux into some of the networking devices."
"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."
"On-prem network monitoring is something that could be improved drastically."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
OpenText Operations Bridge is ranked 8th in Event Monitoring with 44 reviews while SCOM is ranked 3rd in Event Monitoring with 77 reviews. OpenText Operations Bridge is rated 7.8, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of OpenText Operations Bridge writes "Good event correlation capabilities, promotes a self-service approach to monitoring". 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". OpenText Operations Bridge is most compared with OpsRamp, BMC Helix Monitor, Splunk Enterprise Security, IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus and IDERA SQL Diagnostic Manager for SQL Server, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and SolarWinds NPM. See our OpenText Operations Bridge vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Event 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.
