ScienceLogic Reviews

ScienceLogic is primarily a network monitoring tool. We used it alongside another tool. Initially, ScienceLogic was supposed to replace the old tool, but we used it for so long and never fully transitioned. ScienceLogic has a lot of benefits, with additional functionality through power packs and the ability to build things out manually. It is also more flexible than other tools but very manual to configure.

Initially, we received some help configuring ScienceLogic to monitor externally polling databases. ScienceLogic also combined that with its network device polling and gave us a complete picture. We had about 1500 branch locations and 100 on-premise network devices, so ScienceLogic was the tool that could merge those two worlds.

The best feature is the highly flexible graphs. If you have the time, the output allows you to input the precise information you want. In addition, the solution enabled us to make a single dashboard displaying about 12 vital statistics as we needed them.

It is also fairly extensible, and power packs are available. The modules slot in and extend the functionality. We had the most mileage out of monitoring UPSs, and power supplies in our data center.

I've used SolarWinds, Datadog and Grafana, but ScienceLogic has a particular architecture that is difficult to understand. There may have been some improvements, but the fundamental architecture around the design is different from other tools. All the other solutions have similar architecture like S&P and OIDs and play with the same four underlying technologies. ScienceLogic, however, is not very user-friendly. It has very interesting design paradigms but is not the easiest to use until you understand it.

Regarding additional features, it would be great if ScienceLogic could improve its notification feature. The company had a good-sized network team of about 30 people. However, only about two or three people did most of the work in ScienceLogic. For example, somebody would re-patch cables or turn up a new switch, and they wouldn't change the things in the monitoring tools. Instead, they would physically change the equipment or the configs. Also, if we didn't have proactive communication, dashboards would break, graphs would stop working, and alerts wouldn't fire because no one was aware. Therefore, some notification would have been helpful. For example, some tools send notifications saying, "Hey, this isn't working anymore. Do you want to do something about it?". ScienceLogic has a tiny little icon that looks like a bomb. If you go into a dashboard panel, it will say, "Hey, missing data." But aside from that, it is just a blank dashboard panel. It doesn't notify us to say, "Hey, I'm no longer receiving data," So I would recommend a proactive notification feature.

In addition, we lobbied for a Runbook automation feature for a long time and were told it may be included in a future release. I am unsure if they have included it now. We wanted it completed overnight when we had offshore people working and during the day when the actual engineers were on the phone or in the office. But they couldn't complete time-based, contextual Runbook automation. We argued with them for about a year and a half, so I hope it has been included.

We used this solution for about seven years at my previous company. I moved to a new company two months ago. The solution was deployed on-premises.

The stability was very good, and we only experienced one isolated issue. The stability was good because we were versions behind with ScienceLogic for about a year and a half, rebooted it every other week, and it still ran fine for years. So realistically, all things considered, I would say it's more resilient than average for the products in that market.

The solution is scalable, but it was challenging onboarding users to ScienceLogic even if we gave them an AD and put them in an AD group. The user would log in, fail, and their profile would lock. It would then create a nonfunctional profile, and we would have to go to that profile and assign them a read-only, administrator, or power user level. Then, we would have to give them access after they logged in or tried to log in and failed. It was an issue for several years and made it difficult to onboard new users. ScienceLogic should have a good access control model that does not rely on just locking the user out. We had about 30 users that actively used the solution, but about five to eight were administrative users.

I rate the technical support a six out of ten for break-fix issues. However, their installation assistance was better when we upgraded, and I rate that an eight out of ten.

The initial setup was average. It was not difficult to turn on. We had a dedicated appliance that was very easy to use. You plug it, turn it on and give an IP address.

The second time we set up Science Logic, we put it on a VM. Turning it on was pretty straightforward but getting it configured was a Herculean task and a lot of work. It was a very manual process apart from the power packs, which give you specific settings that make some of it easier.

So, if you want to use ScienceLogic, you need to include the costs of a minimum of two consultants for six months, depending on the size of your network or hire one person full-time to take care of it. It is a lot of work. For example, people re-patch a cable, and you have to change labels, or weddings show up on your graphs, which requires upkeep.

I am unsure of the exact ROI. Other solutions are cheaper, but for a national enterprise, it may be worth it to pay. When a branch network was down, it became costly to manage. ScienceLogic was good at proactively identifying problems. When a branch was down, ScienceLogic will act and turn a 45-minute outage into a 20-minute outage, or they would see the early warning signs and solve it in advance. We had about eight occurrences where our branch network was down, and ScienceLogic reduced the outage length for about three of them.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. It is as good as any tool on the market for true network monitoring and robust features. It is flexible and relatively extensible, but it is not easy to use.

ScienceLogic is slow to adjust to a rapidly changing market as everything is moving towards a holistic SRE approach. ScienceLogic is moving in that direction with the change ticket system, change tracking system pipes into a Datadog or a BigPanda and AI ops tools, but they are not keeping pace with the market.

We chose this solution because we knew how it worked, and the core competency of ScienceLogic is its core network monitoring functionality. It provided the needed features and bridged the gap between our distributed branch network and quarter enterprise network, which was sufficient.

If someone were using this solution for the first time, I would recommend getting a consultant and understanding what matters to the business. The business needs should dictate the monitoring. You need to ask questions like, How long does it take to load? When does the network circuit blip? Are the servers overloaded? It would help if you also had an expert who could understand the tool and have answers to these questions. If you already have a knock engineer or an SRE, ScienceLogic, it would be difficult for them to understand the tool. You may have to pair somebody who knows the business, needs and environment with somebody who has all the ScienceLogic expertise.

We use the solution to monitor servers and DNSs.

The solution provides good infra-monitoring features. It sends me alerts.

The tool must provide a deep-down view of the infrastructure. It must add API. I would like to see how many items are waiting in a queue. I would like to monitor the database performance and know how many queries are going on or how much CPU space is used. The product is not user-friendly. We need to familiarize ourselves with it. We must gain some knowledge before starting to work with it.

I have been using the solution for a year.

I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. It is quite stable. It is always up. It hardly ever goes down.

The tool has medium scalability. I rate the scalability a seven out of ten. We have more than 1000 users. I use the product every day. We might increase the usage if we get more add-ons.

We were using Nagios before. ScienceLogic is a bit better.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

The tool works well. I do not have any issues with it. Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

We are using ScienceLogic for monitoring and orchestrating the remediation.

ScienceLogic has helped our company by monitoring. We have old tools we use and the functionality has been good.

The most valuable features of ScienceLogic are AI and machine learning.

ScienceLogic could improve the implementation, it could be made easier.

I have been using ScienceLogic for approximately three years. 

ScienceLogic is stable, it performs well.

The scalability of ScienceLogic could improve, it should be easier. The cloud versions could be easier but the on-premise version is not simple.

Administrators only use the solution directly whereas we have approximately 20,000 endpoints using it. Depending on the company's growth will decide if we will increase usage of the solution.

The support we received from ScienceLogic was good.

We are using HPE solutions in parallel to ScienceLogic.

Implementing ScienceLogic as a monitoring tool was quick. It took us approximately six to nine months, plus another 20 months to link it to our automation framework.

We did the deployment with the ScienceLogic team's help.

We have received an ROI from the use of ScienceLogic. We are getting better visibility and help on the platform.

The license of ScienceLogic is based on how many endpoints are used. The number of monitoring points you want to have.

I rate the price of ScienceLogic a three out of five.

When we evaluated solutions ScienceLogic was positioned first because it fits our use case and the potential of the new feature. We are looking to use AI and machine learning.

We have five to six people that are used for the maintenance of the solution.

My advice to others is they need to map their requirement with the tool to see if it meets their needs. They might be able to find a less expensive tool that can meet all of their needs. The tool has a lot of capabilities but it is important to size it effectively.

I rate ScienceLogic a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of ScienceLogic is as a monitoring tool. We wanted something adaptable that could monitor numerous environments and specific monitoring based on the vendor. We're a supporting organization with 170 data centers around the world. I'm a technical lead and we are customers of ScienceLogic. 

The most valuable feature is an OS that enables the deployment of a virtual machine. The product provides agentless monitoring which is based on SNMP so there's no need to install the monitoring agent on each and every server. Other credentials and monitoring are also included. We get great reports and integration is also excellent. This is a simple, easy-to-use tool. 

We often face bugs when there's a new release. 

I used this solution for six years. 

This is a stable solution and there are rarely any issues.

Scalability is good, we can increase the number of users we want. 

We have premium support so the customer service is generally good. They sometimes choose to lower the urgency of our request and then it can take a few days to get a response which can be an issue for our customers. 

Positive

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. Deployment time depends on the infrastructure. If you have less than 1000 servers, then the setup doesn't take long and can be completed within a few weeks. A larger deployment will take longer. 

The solution is an OS so a license is mandatory.

This is a pretty user-friendly tool. Much has improved in the newer version from a monitoring perspective. Everything will be in the UA so nothing is required at the back end. 

I rate this solution nine out of 10 because of its simplicity. 

I work for three companies where the usage is different. Earlier, the main usage is to monitor customer service. Later on, it was a tool used for a combination of both Splunk and ScienceLogic. Now it is different, and now we are using it to look for limited server monitoring. It's different in all the different ways I have been worked with the tool. However, basically, it's for monitoring for the most part.

The monitoring is very good.

It is simple. We can see whatever is going on. Easily, we can discover everything. We can monitor our virtuality. Mainly the monitoring is simple on the server, and we can easily correct things if there is any problem on the server.

The back end is all right. However, when we are in the documentation area, we don't get any details. We want to understand: how does the back end work? What if some problem occurs? What we can do? They need to provide more information. 

Maybe they should do more Power Packs. We do take requirements from the customer. If they want to add to Power Packs, we need to write our own custom scripts. It might be helpful to already have it included. 

I've been using the solution for around four years.

In terms of stability, whenever we have a huge device that's mounting, if one of the devices gets a lot of events it can go down. We need to be careful. We need to add a device monthly to ensure the solution doesn't get flooded. 

The scalability is good in that you can always add more users. There's no limit to the number of users. I'm not sure the exact amount of people that are using it right now as everyone has access to a lot of tools. IN my team, however, only three people use it currently. 

I've been in touch with the technical team. In the beginning, we dealt with them a lot more as we didn't have any real knowledge of the solution. As we picked up processes we've used them a bit less. However, they were always helpful.

Neutral

We did previously use NETSCOUT. We didn't have the equipment, however. It came from the client. 

There are two types of architecture. One is an all-in-one, and the other one is like a distributor. We went for the all-in-one option. It's very easy to set up. The distributor is a bit more complex. However, items like message collected, data collected and admin portal and database are like deploying one component at a time. Once we deployed them, we needed to connect to them. We needed support during that period. We needed a team. 

The deployment is quick. We could do it over a few hours on a Sunday.

While you do have to pay for licensing, I can't speak to the exact cost.

We're a customer.

I'd recommend the solution to others.

There are many marketing tools in the market. I have less experience with those. I do, however, have experience with ScienceLogic. It has a good design. You might need someone from support to do the installation. However, apart from the installation, you can understand everything very easily. It has a lot of integration capabilities as well. We can integrate with a lot of things. We can monitor emails. We can monitor APL. We can handle customization and automation and there is a great dashboard. They have lot of features to take advantage of. That's why people should go and use the tool.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We use the solution for monitoring networks, applications, and server environments.

ScienceLogic has all functions in one solution.

The user interface could be improved. The sizing and footprints of the central environment need improvement, too. 

The solution lacks functionality. The main issue is the granularity of user management.

I have been using ScienceLogic for three months.

The product is stable.

The footprint and complexity of ScienceLogic can require significant memory, CPU, and disk space. This can lead to overloaded servers and components, resulting in a sluggish user interface.

A total of 400 users are using this solution.

I rate the solution’s scalability a six out of ten.

We had very limited contact with customer support.

I can compare it with Broadcom. ScienceLogic is cheaper with less functionality.

The initial setup is very complex.

ScienceLogic comes with a good price.

I rate the product’s pricing a ten out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

We use the product to monitor our servers, network switches, and other devices. We can check if there are any issues with the patching.

ScienceLogic allows us to create and customize a user-friendly dashboard. Additionally, there are role-based access features for admins.

Admins do not have direct access to the reporting. It goes first to the AIOps team, who have access to reports. They forward based on what is required and requested through us. We have to follow up protocols to get through that. It needs improvement. 

I have been using ScienceLogic as a customer for the last nine months. We are using the latest version.

Initially, we encountered customization-related issues. I rate the product’s stability a six out of ten.

Adding resources is easy and accessible in ScienceLogic. You can customize and monitor and can have automated management. You can write automation scripts with the right level of access and send alerts and notifications. It is a built-in feature, but only some have access to it.

In my team, we have 25 ScienceLogic admins. In the AIOps team, we have another 50 users. Its scalability is a seven or eight out of ten.

Our AIOps team manages the application and does the customizations for each team. They initiate contact with the technical support team.

The setup is straightforward. It is easy to manage and check for alerts. The classification of alerts is specific. It makes it easier for admins to manage alerts. We can quickly identify what is critical and a warning-level alert. We move the managed servers across the network while migrating the clients' data from other products to ScienceLogic.

ScienceLogic is a great tool for system administrators. It is convenient and feature-rich, with a lot of customization options available. The dashboards and support information are very specific and detailed; you can customize it for convenience. The pre-built information is also very useful and granular, making it easy to identify problems. The alert levels are well-defined and can be customized for each customer. ScienceLogic is also very intuitive and can automatically pick up signals and categorize alerts.

ScienceLogic's alert system is already top-notch, but you can also customize it further to meet the needs of each customer specifically. For example, you can set different alert levels for different SLAs. You can also customize the alert notifications to be sent to the appropriate people. This way, you can ensure all alerts are handled quickly and efficiently. We can also customize the alert levels depending on the nature of the issue. The alert system is designed well and provides very specific load ratings. However, we can customize the alerts per our customer's SL agreements.

Overall, I rate ScienceLogic an eight out of ten.

It's an IT infrastructure monitoring tool. It's mostly used by the IT team. It monitors the environment like the server database and cloud environment. 

ScienceLogic is a good tool. It has good capabilities as an SaaS product. 

It has good monitoring capabilities across cloud environments, data centers, and hybrid environments. 

It covers lots of technologies from a monitoring perspective and with its AIOps and event management there. It has good capabilities around that. 

I like the APM, the topology mapping they have, and the business service mapping that they can pick up and then feed into any CMTP like in the ICMTP. It has a good feature in that area. It's a good tool from a utilization perspective for monitoring the environment.

The scalability is excellent.

From a performance perspective, it needs to improve a lot. Even though it says that it's enterprise level, we have seen lots of issues from a monitoring perspective. When we monitor a huge volume there are problems. We need more customizations on the templates. They're not that useful. To customize it, you have got to go through a lot of effort. 

The professional support that ScienceLogic provides most of the time does not have that skill set to help.

The stability could be better.

I've been using the solution for five years.

We have had issues with stability. When it is in a huge environment, we did have seen some issues around the stability in that area when using it for monitoring large environments.

The product has outstanding scalability. We did not see many issues around that so far.

Support is lacking. They are not very knowledgeable sometimes. 

Neutral

It is easy to set up. It is a SaaS product and has agentless monitoring. From a setup perspective, it is easy.

The deployment depends. It can be set up in two weeks or six weeks. However, normally, we're seeing the deployment done in two to three weeks. It's a quick deployment that is happening. It all depends upon the environment and the requirements that need to be there. Generally, it's a quick deployment.

We have seen an ROI.

The monitoring tool does not give a return on investment in the first year. Normally, it happens in the second or third year. In the first year, it is more about improving the capability of their environment, and managing the environment. From the second year, they resolve incidents or improve visibility. So from the second year onwards, ROI may not be that high, however, we have seen that customers are getting that benefits.

They are subscription based. From the pricing model perspective, it's very simple, and licensing is not very complex. It's based on the number of network devices. They have some calculations which are very straightforward and very easy to use. There are no hidden charges.

We are a partner and reseller.

The product has multiple deployment options. They do offer us a SaaS product. Therefore, it's available in the public cloud. Users have the option to deploy on-premises. It can be deployed in a private cloud or according to the customer's requirements. It has the flexibility to do that.

I'd rate it a seven out of ten. 

It's a good tool for monitoring hybrid environments. I would recommend it to others from a hybrid monitoring perspective and from a server database perspective. However, it does not have good capabilities for monitoring networks. It should not be used as a network monitoring solution. It needs to be more focused on infrastructure.