Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM) vs. Workspace ONE Intelligence for Consumer Apps

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

Crittercism is best as a bread crumb trail, stack track logging service to debug applications when you have an issue detecting a problem in your application. Its strength is not as a real-time logging platform to allow you to view production logs in real-time. However, it would be an extremely beneficial feature for Crittercism to add.

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

• Identifying crashes users are experiencing.
• Allowing us to see how many times the crash occurred.
• Allowing us to see what times the crashes have occurred.

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• The OOB SCOM reports are a bit clunky and feel outdated.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

• Pointing to exact line number of the crash
• A more explicit navigation bar (a little confusing for the user)
• Third-party API specific crash reporting (instead of just listing the endpoint)

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

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

A similar product we use is Conviva. I personally prefer Crittercism as Conviva seems to miss things fairly often. Critter tends to catch most issues as long as development has set the app up for it. I've had to reproduce issues several times before Conviva catches it whereas Crittercism will catch it on the first try

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

• Allow us to release iOS versions quicker to the app store
• Help us solve bugs and view bread crumb trails on money-making actions within the API
• Points us to problems in the stack trace with a direct correlation to our route creation aspect in the app

Incentivized