We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Pandora FMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution has a very good set of features."
"I like its ease of use. It does what you need it to do, and it's a one-stop-shop for the company and for all your deployments. If you incorporate Intune into it, you can have both. You can bring your own devices and corporate devices, and everything runs out of SCCM and Intune."
"One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined process has significantly improved our software distribution workflows."
"We're a Microsoft-centric organization, so we are happy with the integration between products."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"Patching is very effective and reporting is very good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to deploy patches to nearly all applications."
"The product is very stable compared to older versions."
"It allows me to quickly see the status of all of my printers, switches, computers, and virtual machines to determine if any system has fallen."
"It provides us with proactive monitoring and is very easy to configure and maintain."
"What I value most about Pandora FMS is the simplicity of working with it."
"We are able to control our business with this all-in-one monitoring tool."
"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 is so lightweight that with only 4GB of ram, it allows keeping track of up to two hundred agents from a single console."
"This product has allowed us to identify and correct certain issues that were affecting our solution."
"The administration of the console is very easy. I like that Pandora FMS is interactive and easy to manage."
"I would like to see an agentless version of the solution."
"I want the system to provide some dependency relations. I would also like to see the relationship between different machines."
"There's no way to say, "I want this maintenance window to be on the second Tuesday of the month." It's strict. This window is this and that's it. You can't fluctuate."
"In spite of us being a premier customer we find the support unsatisfactory."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"With Microsoft Premier Support, you get what you pay for. There's Third Tier Support that you pay for. If you pay for that, you get excellent support, and if you don't pay for that, then you get the less experienced staff."
"They should improve their anti-malware policies like the SCEP policies. For instance, you can't have different policies for different servers, there is only one policy in all the servers, and everything is covered under that. For example, say you want to scan one group of servers on Saturday, and then you want to scan another group of servers on Sunday, you can't do that. You have to scan all your servers, a regular scan or a full scan, on the same day and at the same time. That's definitely one thing they need to resolve. In the next release, it would actually be nice if they included Apple products. It will also help if you can use Intune again. Their compliance reporting feature could also be better. They can maybe work a bit on that for patching now. It would be better if SCCM came with the functions of Right Click Tools built-in. If SCCM would have all those functions already built-in, we won't have to go and spend $5,000, just as an add-in from another company to get those functions."
"The configuration of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could be improved, it is a bit complicated."
"Pandora FMS is an overall great monitoring solution, but it does not have a community that is as large as Zabbix or Nagios."
"We would like to see improvement in the mainframe integration that this solution is capable of."
"Pandora could deliver better analytics out of the box. You can work around these limitations with the help of other tools like Grafana. The shortcomings are mostly on the graphical side. The built-in report generators are a bit limited in some areas."
"I think some improvements to the Android app would be good."
"I would like to have a dashboard with all assets displayed, with a quick hover-over status."
"When it comes to the definition of local Software Agents for the first time in the open-source version, it can become very tedious."
"It would be useful if Pandora FMS included an ISO image (or «software appliance») for each big company that leases virtual private machines (VPS), just like in AWS."
"Improvements are needed for server and network discovery, including service-based discovery."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while Pandora FMS is ranked 10th in Server Monitoring with 22 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Pandora FMS is rated 9.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Pandora FMS writes "The open architecture is easy to extend and enhance". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Pandora FMS is most compared with Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wazuh, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Pandora FMS report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server 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.
