No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Microsoft System Center vs Zenoss Cloud comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Dec 18, 2024

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Microsoft System Center
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
17th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
42nd
Average Rating
7.8
Reviews Sentiment
6.8
Number of Reviews
20
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Zenoss Cloud
Ranking in Application Infrastructure
19th
Ranking in Cloud Monitoring Software
41st
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.1
Number of Reviews
8
Ranking in other categories
Event Monitoring (14th), Network Monitoring Software (64th), Server Monitoring (25th), IT Infrastructure Monitoring (50th), Container Monitoring (8th), AIOps (28th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of September 2026, in the Application Infrastructure category, the mindshare of Microsoft System Center is 2.7%, up from 1.5% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Zenoss Cloud is 1.9%, up from 0.6% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Application Infrastructure Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
Microsoft System Center2.7%
Zenoss Cloud1.9%
Other95.4%
Application Infrastructure
 

Featured Reviews

Carl Palapal - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Sys. Server & Storage Egineer / Tech .Consultant at CANAR OFFICE SYSTEMS
Provides comprehensive system management with effective deployment and integration capabilities
The advantages of Microsoft System Center are significant, and I have seen other products as well. As far as advantages are concerned, they have PXE deployment, which is good for deploying operating systems, such as Windows client systems including Windows 10 and Windows 11. Since it is a Microsoft product, all the patches are proprietary, making it easier to deploy. In Microsoft System Center, all the features are integrated already, whereas in ManageEngine, you have to license each feature individually to access those features. The automated features of Virtual Machine Manager are very useful; it automates as long as the policy that I have created is in line with the objective, especially the templates when I'm going to deploy. Regarding endpoint management, Microsoft System Center is very helpful; it has integrated endpoint protection deployment, allowing me to handle endpoint configuration, system deployment, and patch deployment, making it an all-in-one stop shop for managing and configuring end clients. The impact of using Microsoft System Center is significant; it gives me a whole picture of my environment, making it easy to get inventory details regarding applications and hardware, providing full visibility of my setup within the organization.
ClaudiaChen - PeerSpot reviewer
Cloud Architect - Senior Technology Architect at Telstra
Generates close to real-time alerts so users can resolve issues, but needs more integration and public cloud monitoring features
As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The availability performance matrix and the reporting capabilities are the solution's most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft System Center is its GUI (graphical user interface)."
"Integrates great with other Microsoft Products."
"For the Wintel estate currently SCOM is the best fit for the interim in terms of cost, feature, and function."
"The product's initial setup phase was easy."
"The solution is easily available. That's its most valuable aspect."
"This solution has helped us to have better visibility of what we have in our environment, the stages of access, and it allows me to see everything I need to better communicate with the business easily concerning the situations of our services."
"The deployment and asset management features are the most valuable. These are the product's main features."
"The custom built integration is one of the most valuable features because you can see all the especially critical items."
"With this solution, they can have one million users at the same time with no crashes."
"The product offers good documentation that helps with initial training."
"It is the most flexible solution of this type, but it takes time to adapt."
"They have also accommodated many state-of-the-art technologies like Docker and ZooKeeper."
"Its Docker Container concept is mind blowing. It is the first monitoring tool which comes with Docker features."
"What I like most about Zenoss Service Dynamics is that it monitors the devices and gives close to real-time alerts. For example, in case the device is not available, Zenoss Service Dynamics generates an alert so my team can resolve the issue."
"Zenoss is more complex than LogicMonitor, but scalable and hugely customizable."
 

Cons

"Microsoft System Center should be easier to manage. However, it is complex to deploy, so people hesitate to use it. Though it has many features, such as licensing, asset tracking, and software deployment, we mainly use it for Windows updates. It protects many screens and integrates with databases, but it's complex compared to other solutions. Many now use cloud-based products or other tools like Automox to deploy updates and manage vulnerabilities."
"Could be more user friendly."
"The most difficult area we faced was the requirement of having one central system center that deployed in one domain, capable of managing and controlling the end user devices."
"Less server consumption would help, as would better, more flexible reports."
"System Center hasn't updated to keep up with the industry. It needs improvements in the user interface, ease of use, and overall product functionality, particularly the cloud-monitoring features. It needs more capabilities to monitor AWS and Azure infrastructure."
"The disadvantage of Microsoft System Center is related to the many integrated services; if one service is failing, then all features will be affected."
"I wouldn't describe the solution as scalable. That's not necessarily why you would use it."
"Implementation and integration in the case of multi-tenant environments needs improvement."
"Technical support is 3/10, poor: Incomplete and poor documentation Undocumented processes Inconsistent solutions to problems depending on source"
"The inclusion of a feature to show a graphical view of the network would be a helpful improvement."
"There was a problem with Zenoss and storage monitoring."
"This solution is complex for beginners so it takes some time to learn."
"As Zenoss Service Dynamics is more for network-centric devices and you want to monitor, for example, a server, its services, IP addresses, and interfaces, if it's a network and you're going to monitor multiple items, you'll be charged multiple times. This is what Zenoss Service Dynamics needs to improve to make sure that customers pay just one fee to monitor the entire server. What I'd like to see in Zenoss Service Dynamics in the future is a public cloud monitoring feature, particularly for the Azure public cloud. Another additional feature I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is integration with the Azure public cloud because I know that there are some services from Azure that Zenoss Service Dynamics is currently unable to monitor."
"There is room for improvement with the administrative part. They introduced Control Center to manage things in Zenoss 5. The services that Zenoss provides remained the same, but the administrative part, since they introduced Docker, etc., has become a little complex"
"It would be ideal if the product offered sound alerts."
"Now it is stable, but they should design threshold parameters in percentage instead of raw values."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"I rate the product price as five to six on a scale of one to ten, where one means it is cheap and ten means it is expensive."
"I know that sometimes there is some reduction in the prices of Microsoft System Center because of the costs of Microsoft SQL Server, which can be advantageous."
"It's rolled into our enterprise subscription. The entire subscription is around $25,000 a year, however, that covers all the products that we use."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"Microsoft System Center's licensing is costly."
"Microsoft System Center is quite expensive."
"We maximized our license investment."
"It is very cost-effective compared to the tools I worked with in the past. The company is gaining a lot with respect to the cost factor. It provides agentless monitoring and in a very cheap way."
"The pricing depends on the environment, the number of services, and the size of the data center. It can go from $100,000 to a million dollars."
"There are additional costs you'll have to pay apart from the license fee for Zenoss Service Dynamics. I can't remember exactly how much my company is paying because I don't handle the finance part, but the cost is paid annually. On a scale of one to five, with one being the cheapest and five being the most expensive, I'm rating the solution three out of five."
"It depends on the customer, what he wants."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Application Infrastructure solutions are best for your needs.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Construction Company
15%
Manufacturing Company
10%
Comms Service Provider
10%
Financial Services Firm
7%
Comms Service Provider
14%
Construction Company
13%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise10
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business4
Large Enterprise5
 

Questions from the Community

What needs improvement with Microsoft System Center?
The disadvantage of Microsoft System Center is related to the many integrated services; if one service is failing, then all features will be affected. For example, with site configuration, when one...
What is your primary use case for Microsoft System Center?
I am using Microsoft System Center. I use Microsoft System Center for patch deployment and application deployment.
What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft System Center?
The connection is not very stable. I rate Microsoft System Center a nine out of ten.
What is the best network monitoring software for large enterprises?
In my experience, I worked with many monitoring software, but the one that gave me the most functionalities of a large-scale company is Zenoss, due to its ability to monitor completely hybrid and a...
 

Also Known As

MS System Center
Cloud Monitoring, Zenoss Service Dynamics
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Kassen_rztliche Vereinigung Nordrhein, Magyar Telekom Nyrt., Adeka, QualCare, Aeriandi, UniCredit Bank d.d., Mostar, Allianz Australia Ltd., Grupo Familia
2degrees, Rackspace, State of North Dakota, El Paso Independent School District, NWN Corporation
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft System Center vs. Zenoss Cloud and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
913,806 professionals have used our research since 2012.