We performed a comparison between OpenText Operations Bridge and ScienceLogic 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."It is stable."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not complex at all."
"We use the on-premises version to monitor our systems and manage emails. All our systems use Operations Bridge, especially the critical systems."
"It has greatly reduced the number and duration of outages as support teams are notified immediately when something goes wrong or even before something breaks."
"I've found the solution to be very scalable."
"The correlation feature is the most used feature. It allows you to correlate events from different sources and have more meaningful events."
"We haven't faced any stability issues. There hasn't been any crashes or glitches."
"The most valuable feature is that everything can be consolidated into one dashboard."
"It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments."
"The best feature is the highly flexible graphs."
"Power packs."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"The power flow is great."
"Science Logic provides distributed and all-in-one concept in monitoring, you can easily customize the features in this product."
"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 tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"The solution is overall "heavy", requiring multiple servers, even without HA."
"The latest versions of the service reporting dashboards need improvement, such as service modeling."
"pology-based event correlation does not work well with NNM events."
"The price is quite expensive, and because of this, we may try another solution."
"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 is a very complicated product. It's difficult to manage. Nowadays, products are very easy to manage, deploy, and integrate, but Operations Bridge is very complicated to manage."
"The initial setup of this tool is complex for people who lack experience with it."
"The initial setup is a little bit complex."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"The product's reporting functionalities have certain shortcomings, making it an area where improvements are required."
"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."
OpenText Operations Bridge is ranked 8th in Event Monitoring with 44 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 5th in Event Monitoring with 42 reviews. OpenText Operations Bridge is rated 7.8, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. 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 ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". OpenText Operations Bridge is most compared with SCOM, OpsRamp, BMC Helix Monitor and Splunk Enterprise Security, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and ServiceNow Discovery. See our OpenText Operations Bridge vs. ScienceLogic report.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors, best IT Operations Analytics vendors, and best Cloud Monitoring Software 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.