Everbridge IT Alerting vs. Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)

Targeting people (or their SIM cards to be specific) in a specific area and warning them about a hazard in their neighbourhood is the intended use, and it executes that perfectly. In addition we have implemented the traveller alert where we can send messages to all Icelandic SIM cards present inside another Country (another Country code), and send them messages about f.ex. terrorist attack and provide guidelines about where they shoud seek assistance if needed. A slight minus here is that you can only address entire countries, where it might be useful to have next level of area codes.

Incentivized

More appropriate for:

• Pure Microsoft ecosystem environments (Windows Server and SQL server) and the most common Linux and UNIX platforms.
• Environments where cost is less of a factor than settling on a single platform for monitoring
• Environments where the administrators are familiar with the setup and installation of SCOM.

Less appropriate for:

• Pure UNIX/Linux shops, especially versions not supported out of the box by SCOM.
• Shops that cannot afford the engagement to setup/configure and maintain on a continuous basis.
• Shops that cannot dedicate personnel to the care and feeding of SCOM, especially when supporting larger environments.

Incentivized

• Allows us to visualize our systems in a single interface and see the status of health as well as relevant performance metrics.
• A flexible and powerful interface with active alerting covering domain controllers, SQL servers, etc...
• Allows you to customize your views and workspaces for specific tasks and needs.
• Reporting is powerful and flexible.

Incentivized

• One of the biggest drawbacks to SCOM is the sheer scope and complexity of the system. This can be a pro and a con. The system is very customizable, what you put into it is what you'll get out of it. That said, the learning curve is fairly steep. An organization needs to be committed to putting time and resources into SCOM to get the most out of it. I've heard stories from colleagues of several different companies that invested in SCOM and then abandoned it due to the excessive time and care required.
• SCOM is expensive. Not only is the enterprise licensing costly, SCOM requires it's own servers, operational and warehouse databases to be maintained.
• The OOB SCOM reports are a bit clunky and feel outdated.

Incentivized

I would really like to have easier reporting. What warnings were issued, when, and received by how many, by operator or area etc..

Incentivized

The support team has been very supportive, but there is only so much they can do, and of course sometimes things take a bit too long for my impatience.

Incentivized

Hard to get support. The product is not being actively developed anymore, so it is hard to get new features for the product.

Incentivized

I have reviewed quite a few at conferences, but none to the depth of installation and use.

Incentivized

We used Altiris and WSUS and in the beginning Altiris had the better admin interface than SCOM, but it is no longer the case as SCOM has refined their admin interface. Altiris still has better and more robust group assignments for management roles and those two other tools can better manage non Windows OS devices than SCOM but for a large enterprise Windows shop, if you can afford it, SCOM is the way to go.

Incentivized

• The government has the duty to equip itself with a mechanism to warn its people. It has allocated that duty to us, and we have chosen Everbridge to provide us the tool for that duty. It is very well suited to fulfill that role.

Incentivized

• It has allowed us to provide an Enterprise Event/Alert management solution to the Global company
• It has taken a long time to get it to provide valuable alerts and information, lots of user resources and investment.
• It assists with 24/7 monitoring and out of hours support

Incentivized