We performed a comparison between Nagios Core and ScienceLogic 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."
"The most valuable feature depends on the project. It's great if you need to check to ensure a service is running 24/7. I can use the full solution for free, and it's flexible. If I need to add a dashboard, I can integrate it with Nagios. Cloud synchronization is wonderful."
"It is fairly easy to set up, and we can monitor pretty much everything we want to."
"Nagios Core is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Nagios Core is the ability to check the availability of the server for network connectivity. Additionally, the interface is good."
"The most valuable feature of Nagios Core is it allows us to develop and add as many plugins as we want."
"Our customers like that Nagios Core is an open source solution. It can be customized to our customers' specific needs."
"It has made the life of the network operations staff more proactive in managing the resources of the infrastructure. It prevents disasters long before they can take place."
"I like that it's very simple to install, easy to manage and deploy, and easy to use for monitoring."
"ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"The power flow is great."
"Dynamic Component Mapping is key and unique."
"Power packs."
"Its ITSM and EMS combination is really amazing. There is no need to purchase two products, one for ITSM and a second for EMS/NMS."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"It would be nice if the company offered a sales or contract manager that was dedicated to our company so that we would have some sort of link to Nagios, and if we had issues or questions, we'd be able to contact them directly."
"Bandwidth monitoring is the pain point for me because Nagios Core does not monitor bandwidth effectively like Cacti does."
"The core version is no match for the XI version."
"Would benefit from aggregations if a particular server goes down."
"We're using the free version, which limits us in terms of the things that we can do. If we had the paid version, a lot of our issues would probably go away. For example, we can't isolate instances that are being built or updated with the production ones. When they're being built, on Nagios, they're showing in red. It'd be nice to be able to partition those off until they're all green, and then we can bring them into the environment. This is probably because we've got the free version and not the paid version. If we went for the paid version, it would probably allow us to do exactly what we want to or remove the restrictions that we have, but if we are able to isolate instances in the free version, it would make life much easier."
"The initial setup process could be easier."
"The mapping is a little hard."
"The user interface could be more interactive because it is pretty basic."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information."
"ScienceLogic does not have application monitoring. We definitely need something integrated within ScienceLogic to monitor applications so that we don't have to rely on monitoring tools to monitor other applications. At least the ones that are market leaders, such as SAP, Oracle, and others."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"One important area we feel could be improved is the UI. It takes a lot of clicks to do very simple tasks."
"The product is not user-friendly."
"ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier."
Nagios Core is ranked 7th in Network Monitoring Software with 46 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 14th in Network Monitoring Software with 42 reviews. Nagios Core is rated 8.0, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Nagios Core writes "An Open Source Fully Featured Data Centre Monitoring Tool". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Nagios Core is most compared with Zabbix, Nagios XI, Centreon, Icinga and OP5 Monitor, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow Discovery. See our Nagios Core vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors and best IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
