We performed a comparison between Opsview and Pandora FMS 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."
"I am satisfied with the overall product since it works well…It is a stable solution."
"It's a good solution. It covers all aspects of monitoring purposes."
"We use this solution for internal monitoring our own cloud platform because we are a public cloud provider. We also use it for monitoring purposes on behalf of our clients."
"What was very compelling about OpsView was that we could dial out the noise and have meaningful and actionable alerts."
"The most valuable feature of Opsview is the ability to clone the services when you're monitoring something out of the test setup."
"The most valuable feature is that it is an all-in-one monitoring system."
"The monitoring system within this solution is very good. It is easy to use and navigate, and makes issue alarms easily viewable."
"Thanks to its flexibility, I have been able to adapt the tool to our servers and find out quickly how their console works."
"You can configure several types of architecture for high availability or load balancing."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"Pandora FMS provides us with a general report (graphical) about all of the connected devices, which helps with planning new stations and tracking them."
"The solution has good dashboards and graphics."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Some of the graphics on Opsview could be improved."
"Pricing and a few certain aspects in the solution needs to be improved."
"In a future release, we would like to have Observ for AI. Any AI and intelligence it can add to the monitoring is obviously beneficial. We would also like to have automated callouts."
"Customized reporting can be improved."
"Maybe the graphical representation can be improved. It can be enhanced for better visualization. It could be a little better. And the graph center can be improved."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
"In the future, we may have double the number of devices, and we do not want to have any issues with performance in the data display."
"This solution requires proper training to get 100% out of it."
"The price for Pandora FMS is expensive."
"An update to the Android app would be appreciated."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"I would like for the solution to be faster and have a better tolerance between parallel servers for Pandora and Pest Control."
Opsview is ranked 32nd in Network Monitoring Software with 24 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 29th in Network Monitoring Software with 22 reviews. Opsview is rated 8.6, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Opsview writes "Responsive and easy to customize alerts for, while being priced similarly to its competition". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Opsview is most compared with OP5 Monitor, Zabbix, Nagios XI, Instana Infrastructure Monitoring and SCOM, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Opsview vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring 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.