We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management 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 single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"This solution allows us to have an overview of the infrastructure and identify areas where the performance isn't optimal, or where upgrades could be carried out."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"It gives us visibility inside applications. It helps us to dig down and find the root cause of any issue within the network."
"I definitely appreciate the flexibility and ease of use. We've been using UIM for almost three years now. It's pretty much point and click, very easy to use. And we've had no problems scaling it to our own environment."
"MultiWAN and Balance service"
"Monitoring infrastructure and business applications are the most valuable features."
"It delivers our customers many metrics, so they may make decisions"
"I recall the initial setup being straightforward."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"SCOM's most valuable features are the network path feature, reporting, and integration with business intelligence."
"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 solution is used for monitoring the hardware inventory. For instance, it helps with the whole operational monitoring view for the company's infrastructure."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"I enjoy its integration with the Microsoft Active Directory functions, which means users, computers, or other group policies can connect with Windows Active Directory."
"It discovers the components automatically, which is a fantastic thing. The discovery works in an automatic way, and it has a dynamic way of discovering the components, assets, and applications. It doesn't require any manual intervention."
"The most valuable features in SCOM are Azure monitoring and integration with Azure Monitor for monitoring Azure-hosted servers from SCOM on-premises."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"There is also room for improvement in the reporting. It is not really good enough, according to our customers. So what we now usually do is use Power BI to get them the kinds of reports they want."
"I'd also like to see more probes. More probes in the sense that we were coming across devices that we're expected to monitor and manage for which, out of the box, there isn't a nice, clean solution. There are probes that are dedicated for certain devices and certain device types, which is great. But then there are times we come across nuanced products that we have to develop our own solution for. There are probes that exist in there that allow us to make a customized solution, but it takes a lot more time."
"The biggest feature that I've been hoping they would enhance on is inventory management: things like adding/removing nodes."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"CA UIM needs some improvement with performance reporting (if we compare it to CA eHealth)."
"Making a GUI with criteria such as selection by robot/hub/probe etc."
"Reporting capability can be improved especially when it comes to availability."
"The UIM has no features through goods and services yet. "
"Third-party tools have had to be created to make SCOM management pack creation more efficient and effective. However, this weighs down the application as it just adds a resource requirement, which is ballooning the size of the necessary storage and all that for essentially substandard components."
"The configurations could be better. There are multiple tests where you can do something, but they can be a trigger as well. The overriding methodologies are not that easy. The configurations are difficult. The configuration and thorough day-to-day operations to get them to the level you want takes some time. It's very difficult."
"It'll help if they can provide real-time or closer to real-time monitoring."
"The solution can be improved by expanding to cloud usage."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
"Stability and some performance issues exist and they need improvement."
"There could be more integration of SIM in the solution."
"The GI is difficult to work with and the reporting servers are also difficult."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while SCOM is ranked 10th in Network Monitoring Software with 78 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". 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". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with ManageEngine OpManager, DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SolarWinds Server and Application Monitor and Zabbix, whereas SCOM is most compared with Dynatrace, Zabbix, Datadog, Nagios XI and ManageEngine OpManager. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management 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.
