Azure Monitor vs. Microsoft System Center

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Azure Monitor
Score 8.1 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's Azure Monitor is designed to analyze and optimize the performance of web applications and infrastructure, including virtual machines (VMs), Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), Azure Storage, and databases. Monitor Linux and Windows VMs and their health and dependencies—all on a single map.
$2.76
pay as you go per GB
Microsoft System Center
Score 8.4 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft System Center Suite is a family of IT management software for network monitoring, updating and patching, endpoint protection with anti-malware, data protection and backup, ITIL- structured IT service management, remote administration and more. It is available in two editions: standard and datacenter. Datacenter provides unlimited virtualization for high density private clouds, while standard is for lightly or non-virtualized private cloud workloads.
$1,323
per month
Pricing
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Editions & Modules
Pay-As-You-Go
$2.76
per GB
100 GB per day
$219.5
2 per day
200 GB per day
$412.1
6 per day
300 GB per day
$604.8
0 per day
400 GB per day
$788.4
8 per day
500 GB per day
$968.8
0 per day
600 GB per day
$1,904
per day
700 GB per day
$3,718
40 per day
800 GB per day
$9,016
per day
Standard Edition
$1323
Datacenter Edition
$3607
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Free Trial
NoNo
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details——
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Top Pros

No answers on this topic

Top Cons
Best Alternatives
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Small Businesses
Auvik
Auvik
Score 8.1 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Medium-sized Companies
Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring
Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring
Score 9.2 out of 10

No answers on this topic

Enterprises
Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring
Splunk Infrastructure Monitoring
Score 9.2 out of 10

No answers on this topic

All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Likelihood to Recommend
7.6
(2 ratings)
8.5
(20 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.0
(1 ratings)
Support Rating
6.7
(2 ratings)
8.0
(1 ratings)
User Testimonials
Azure MonitorMicrosoft System Center
Likelihood to Recommend
Microsoft
We were able to get a single pane of glass for all our monitoring needs on Azure Monitor. However, we would like to see it improve to auto scale out and scale in depending on the load without human intervention. This can help us get to the No Ops model and rely on automated processes rather than manual intervention.
Read full review
Microsoft
We used a product before that was designed to prevent users making changes and saving files to the desktop computer. This required a renewal of the license. By using SCCM in our environment we were able to discontinue using that product because SCCM allows us to completely restore a machine back to the original configuration. We have taught our users to save their individual work on either a network drive or a cloud drive. By doing this, if we do a re-image of their machine they have lost no data, and it makes for a faster resolution. In some instances having a computer in our SCCM environment it can become cumbersome when creating new users for very specific purposes. It can be done by creating new organizational units and applying new policies but when in a pinch it can be frustrating. For the most part we have tried to make "new" purpose images and groups to at least accommodate a quick install.
Read full review
Pros
Microsoft
  • It supports all the Azure PAAS services.
  • Can monitor both infrastructure and application
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Provides our users the ability to deploy and manage our own datacenter based on defined software with understandable solutions for storage, compute, networking and security.
  • We are able to update at once all the computers from all departments without having to install the OS on every computer.
  • It allows us to have everything in one place for database management and datacenter inspection as well.
Read full review
Cons
Microsoft
  • Custom metrics
  • Ease of use
Read full review
Microsoft
  • Needs web based storefront for requesting new software
  • Needs ability to manage the packaging work flow better
  • Sometimes is slow to download and there is no indication the entire catalog is being loaded, resulting in confused users not being able to find common software in the available list.
Read full review
Usability
Microsoft
No answers on this topic
Microsoft
It is not user-friendly for the most part. With IT infrastructure, sometimes it cannot handle excess requests. Every few months, you will need an upgrade in terms of server resources to keep up with incoming alerts and requests. This does not happen all of the time, but it does happen when there are too many requests.
Read full review
Support Rating
Microsoft
I have not had to work with Azure Monitor support, so it is difficult to say how well the support team is. I assume that Azure has a well-versed team on the customer service side to assist with any issues customers may have. I may need them in the feature.
Read full review
Microsoft
If I had to dislike something about the system it would be how much it changes once you upgrade. This could be more of a problem of mine since I get used to one way and don't like it when it changes so much. I am enjoying the newest update, but it is a mess when you are actually going through the upgrades.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
Microsoft
While other tools have their own unique capability, Azure Monitor helps us monitor essential PAAS services that are not supported by other tools. So even though we have one other APM tool, we still rely on Azure Monitor for some of the special PAAS services, this is a huge advantage.
Read full review
Microsoft
We previously used a mix of FOG and Clonezilla to image machines. The biggest issues with these products is that changing one piece of the image required you to rebuild the entire image itself. These pieces of software also did not allow you to manage applications and Windows Updates, causing IT to have to constantly touch machines after they were imaged and update or manage them with a much more hands on approach.
Read full review
Return on Investment
Microsoft
  • We are able to react quickly to the issues.
  • Debugging sessions are yielding quicker results to generate RCA.
Read full review
Microsoft
  • We have been able to automate our patch management, firmware and other security concerns.
  • We have a standardized "image" ensuring our setup is consistent across the enterprise. This alone has saved us in time to support and time to understand how to use our desktops.
Read full review
ScreenShots