We performed a comparison between SCOM and ThousandEyes 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 is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"This is a product that does more generally than any of the competing solutions."
"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 most valuable feature of SCOM is real-time alerts."
"The solution has improved our overrides and the ability to start services if they're stopped."
"It is very good at monitoring Microsoft Server."
"The product’s auto-remediation feature helps with automation."
"The most valuable feature of SCOM is the capability of using classes within your management pack development."
"It's fairly easy to set up."
"The installation process is not hard at all."
"The company provides excellent service."
"The most valuable features are integration and ease of use."
"The solution is very easy to use."
"The authentication overall - including to the VPN and LAN - is excellent."
"ThousandEyes gives companies better visibility."
"The solution's initial setup process was straightforward...In terms of ROI, the solution is worth the money."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Regarding certain issues in the solution, it can be difficult to generate reports if we have a program that is not user-friendly for reporting. While this is not necessarily negative, we may need to use another solution."
"All of the areas of reporting are very bad and need to be improved."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
"Non Windows monitoring is fairly weak. Network device monitoring is not reliable."
"SCOM needs to improve its usability."
"Of course, price is always an issue with Microsoft and could be improved."
"I would like more customized reports. People should have some customization option on the dashboards for whenever they put multiple lists into it. Beyond customizing the content, there should be the ability to customize the colors so that they can engage some priority and mark challenges separately."
"The console feature is very poor, and it would be very good for us if this were improved."
"They only offer synthetic requests."
"ThousandEyes could improve the dashboards by adding more features."
"There is room for improvement in terms of customization and user-friendliness."
"The guest portal is hard to use."
"Once I fully use the tool 100%, I'm sure I would have something to critique, however, for now, I'm happy with it."
"It might be practical to extend monitoring capabilities to include network devices"
"I would like the product to offer more agility."
"It would be nice if the solution covered other areas like server monitoring."
SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews while ThousandEyes is ranked 12th in Network Monitoring Software with 11 reviews. SCOM is rated 7.8, while ThousandEyes is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of SCOM writes "Has a good reporting engine, but its monitoring of the cloud-based environment could be improved". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ThousandEyes writes "Reliable. simple to set up, and offers fast monitoring capabilities". SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and AppDynamics, whereas ThousandEyes is most compared with Cisco Secure Network Analytics, Accedian Skylight, Dynatrace, SolarWinds NPM and AppDynamics. See our SCOM vs. ThousandEyes 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.