We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and ScienceLogic 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."Microsoft Configuration Manager is integrated with other Microsoft products."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the availability of being able to manage the Microsoft estate. It handles many areas, such as asset management and tracking."
"Microsoft has done a good job with authentication solutions, such as single sign-on, or open authentication."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability."
"I like the data collection."
"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."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"The flexibility to support most technologies. The way ScienceLogic gathers data from multiple sources is vital to our customers. As we work with new customers (often with different technology requirements), ScienceLogic is flexible enough to support our clients’ varying network needs."
"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 solution provides good infra-monitoring features."
"The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning."
"Best feature of all is detailed monitoring of services, processes, ports and SSL certificates and or web content."
"Provides agentless monitoring so there's no need to install the agent on each server."
"I'm satisfied with ScienceLogicfor for what they can offer today because they can offer both serverless connectivity and agent connectivity."
"The tool is quite easy to deploy, and it offers very good support."
"The cost of the product can be improved."
"We'd like the solution to make it easier to manage remote users."
"I want the system to provide some dependency relations. I would also like to see the relationship between different machines."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"The setup was complex and I faced a lot of problems initially because I was new to the solution."
"The time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved."
"In spite of us being a premier customer we find the support unsatisfactory."
"It was challenging onboarding users."
"They need a little more self-service."
"Admins do not have direct access to the reporting."
"They should improve database issues in HA and Failover mode, and provide documentation for all users , even if they are not customers."
"There are often bugs in new releases."
"It doesn't have the complete application-level topology. It could have service topology and business service monitoring. I would like to see how business service monitoring will function with agent-based installation, and how flexible and business-oriented it is for service modeling and service infrastructure. I have a lot of experience in using business service monitoring, service topology, and service hierarchy functionalities in similar products from BMC and Micro Focus (OpenView), and I want to see how these functionalities will look like in ScienceLogic."
"ScienceLogic should provide detailed documents to customer as the current documents are not sufficient."
"They should improve their support process and add chat."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while ScienceLogic is ranked 6th in Server Monitoring with 42 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while ScienceLogic is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ScienceLogic writes "Great integrations, power flow, and good support". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Microsoft Intune and Tanium, whereas ScienceLogic is most compared with Dynatrace, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Datadog and Zabbix. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. ScienceLogic 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.