We performed a comparison between Accedian Skylight and SCOM 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 response times, with the performance, are really interesting too, where you can see the packet loss."
"I think the analytics features are okay. My customer also likes the interface, the GUI, because it's easy to operate."
"It is about finding operational problems. When sites go down, we try to determine who is at fault. While there is not much finger-pointing, the solution is just trying to analyse when there is an outage and where do we start looking to fix it. The very nature of why organization chooses to use the solution is to accelerate the meantime to resolution and find where problems lie to get them rectified as quickly as possible."
"The performance of Accedian Skylight is better than other vendors."
"The solution’s UI and single pane of glass is good. The new dashboard is modern with its new design. The look of it is not pretty, but it is efficient, which is good. It is user-friendly; you can find what you need on the interface quickly."
"Capturing traffic [is very interesting]. Currently, with our configuration, we don't capture the payload of the packets, just the header. But when we want the body, the payload of the packets, we can do a PCAP, and then analyze it within Wireshark."
"If [the problem] is something related to HTTP or VoIP, then I can have a quick look into the protocols, a process which gives me some good ideas..."
"The ability to measure performance end-to-end across the cloud data center allows us to take corrective action to keep our channels online."
"It takes a lot of the headache out of managing your data centers and software in other places."
"The ease of deployment, especially on Windows platforms, is valuable."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"It works better than other products I’ve used – namely SolarWinds, which is cumbersome and error prone for web app monitoring. SCOM is not."
"The stability has been great."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"This solution satisfies all of the requirements that we need for our Windows-based systems, so if you are using the Windows platform then this is an easy solution."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"There should be an option to update and upgrade the solution to the new version without having to re-buy it. I have clients switching to other solutions. The old solution is great, but if you change your license to a new one, you have to almost re-buy it completely."
"If you want a new version, you go to the website. The hardest part is finding the link, where is that .bin file? Sometimes it's pretty hidden in a document... it's hidden in the release notes or in another file somewhere. And it's usually not on the first page either."
"It's a bit slow. When I execute a query, something general with a short timeframe that covers one month, for instance, and I do not specify the IP source or IP destination, it can take ages because it has to query the whole database."
"This solution is expensive compared to some others."
"It needs the possibility to export data because it is not easy to see larger data sets, e.g., for one month. It would be interesting to export data into a PDF or dashboard to keep a history of the situation."
"Because of the policies in Vietnam, we cannot connect the system to the Accedian cloud. It would be good if Accedian could provide a local cloud. In the next release, I would like them to focus on improving and adding more reporting features. This will help the operations teams."
"The Accedian Skylight user interface still has room for improvement."
"I would like to see some improvements in parts of their synthetic transactions, which includes all the latency, jitter, and throughput. I would like to see some Layer 7 analytics in there. I want to be able to do a DNS request, HTTP GET request, or even SIP call point-to-point or via registration."
"The solution can be improved by expanding to cloud usage."
"Then there is also an issue with capacity and limited space. That is something that needs to be improved."
"The dashboard features are not user-friendly for our management team, only for the technical department."
"I would like to see better support for monitoring Unix-based systems."
"SCOM's feature that notifies us when a server is down is not present in recent updates, which has weakened the product."
"Direct integration with third-party tools, like ticketing systems, is lacking but would be beneficial."
"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."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
Accedian Skylight is ranked 18th in Network Monitoring Software with 23 reviews while SCOM is ranked 11th in Network Monitoring Software with 77 reviews. Accedian Skylight is rated 9.0, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Accedian Skylight writes "Highly scalable, responsive support, but lacking new features". 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". Accedian Skylight is most compared with ThousandEyes, SolarWinds NPM, NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, Zabbix and Dynatrace, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, Datadog, AppDynamics and Nagios XI. See our Accedian Skylight vs. SCOM report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software 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.