"The initial setup can be pretty simple."
"We have found the scalability capabilities to be okay."
"Availability monitoring is the feature I have found most valuable, as well as the capacity and ability to send notifications."
"The advantages of SCOM are that it is definitely user friendly and a more appropriate solution for what we need."
"Because it's Windows-based, it actually reports quite well. It reports everything you can think of on the Windows server and allows you to monitor anything. It's excellent for those in the Windows world as it's very good at it."
"It's easy to use."
"It is a user-friendly product that requires almost no maintenance."
"The most valuable feature is the monitoring of Windows and Linux servers."
"I like some of their newer features, such as maintenance schedules, because SCOM records SLA and SLO time."
"Technical support is slow and sometimes they don't understand the issues at hand."
"The interface is a little bit cumbersome and certain actions could be simplified."
"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."
"There are some negative points about this product. Sometimes, the capabilities of the software don't appear, and you can't directly see the results. You have to wait for a long period to refresh the policy to push it to the software or other patches."
"The management of the servers could be better."
"They can focus more on cloud monitoring instead of on-premise monitoring. We should be able to monitor cloud-related applications. They can include this feature in the next release. If it is in the cloud, we can have scalability by using Kubernetes. The container is containerized, packaged, and managed using Kubernetes. This feature is not there in SCOM. Going forward, if they can focus on that, it will be great."
"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."
"It would be a much better product if Microsoft provided management packs with the product."
"I would like to see them improve their network monitoring."
IBM Tivoli Business Service Manager is ranked 10th in Event Monitoring with 1 review while SCOM is ranked 1st in Event Monitoring with 14 reviews. IBM Tivoli Business Service Manager is rated 5.0, while SCOM is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of IBM Tivoli Business Service Manager writes "Stable but not updated often enough and doesn't work with cloud infrastructure". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SCOM writes "Feature rich, scalable and user-friendly, but open-source products are free and do the same thing". IBM Tivoli Business Service Manager is most compared with CA OPS MVS Event Management and Automation, whereas SCOM is most compared with Zabbix, Dynatrace, PRTG Network Monitor, Nagios XI and SolarWinds NPM.
See our list of best Event Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Event 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.