GitLab DevSecOps platform enables software innovation by aiming to empower development, security, and operations teams to build better software, faster. With GitLab, teams can create, deliver, and manage code quickly and continuously instead of managing disparate tools and scripts. GitLab helps teams across the complete DevSecOps lifecycle, from developing, securing, and deploying software. Differentiators, as described by Gitlab:
Simplicity: With GitLab, DevSecOps can…
$0
per month per user
Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
Score 7.5 out of 10
N/A
Microsoft's System Center Operations Manager (SCOM) is a monitoring and application performance management option, with the core datacenter and cloud-based systems monitoring.
As mentioned earlier, the features like chart visualization sets it apart from the others. Other than that, GitLab is open source while other are not and comparatively more secure that its other counterparts. Also, GitLab supports adding other types of attachments which is not …
When i was using the other platform, Some time i face down time, But GitLabs its not happening for single time. GitLab is having easy user interference as compared to other platforms. Pull Request, Code review, Issue tracking, Merging, Access control and User Roles is having a …
GitLab is miles ahead of the competition. In so many words, having a simple UI with robust security and the ability to conduct Git actions takes the cake. The competitions like to say they can do these things easily but their products are more confusing and hard to use.
GitLab allows a self-hosted version that is easy to setup and configure. It is also open-source as compared to GitHub. The integrated CI/CD tools is a plus, since we do not have to worry about those tools, unlike Github. The All-in-one solution of GitLab made sense for our …
Gitlab offers the best support for CI/CD pipelines and the highest degree of customisation for workflows, permissions, and integrations. The integration of BitBucket with JIRA is better than GitLab but CI/CD features are limited in comparison. GitLab's built-in Container …
Gitlab provides basic functionality like any other git tool. Some features of push and pull requests , clone and merge is handled equally well. It lacks in AI features which are there in GitHub and setup processes are difficult. Cost difference is the only concern while …
GitHub is an inferior product from most points of view. We had to use it and the teams finds no positives about it. Everything is a downgrade from our previous GitLab solution.
GitLab CI\CD is vastly superior to workflows, for example doing a manual node is just "when : manual" …
It's much simpler than the competitors. The one important feature Gitlab stand out is the CI/CD pipeline. GitHub required integration with external CI tools but Gitlab has this feature built-in. Compare to Jenkins and Teamcity, It's easy to use without any additional Plugins. …
Gitlab seems more cutting-edge than GitHub; however, its AI tools are not yet as mature as those of CoPilot. It feels like the next-generation product, so as we selected a tool for our startup, we decided to invest in the disruptor in the space. While there are fewer …
i have more exoerence in GitLab rather than bitbucket . As personally , it is good for me to understand how things is going on. i have used personally and also in organisation . It is great for developer to see there 3 months ago code and also can come up with new solution to …
Because with Visual Studio code, it was very easy for us to install GitLab in it and have easy access through the terminal and due to GitLab, it was easy to implement codes regarding API and AWS services to make our software better. Gitlens and all features help to check the …
GitLab provides a far superior platform due to it's great integration and CI/CD focus. And while in the beginning the UI might look a bit overwhelming with use you will find it way more useful than it's competitors. The variables and settings also make way more sense and it's …
My feedback may not be important here because when I joined the company they already had GitLab and we still use it due to the ability to do CI/CD Integration, deployments, debugging, code owners approval, and Jira integration. So far we have not had any major blocker that has …
Github is more open-source first and enterprise-first second in their approach. The reverse is true for GitLab. Both are exceptional products and it highly depends on the specific needs of an org
GitLab has a open-source community and great documentation that provides support resources and community contributions. AWS CodeCommit is used for integration with other AWS services in the AWS ecosystem and also have a low community and support compared to GitLab hence …
It was a management decision to use GitLab over other tools. It integrates well with RBAC using Terraform. Runners are easy to setup. Almost all the features the organization used before are available in GitLab.
For small projects or companies that do work on a few only code repositories selecting one of the git code hosting services like GitLab, GitHub, Bitbicket etc does not make a big difference.
But, if you are on a code development company that handles too many repositories and …
Software delivery is the key objective and GitLab made it much easier to hit the group quickly. It worked well with automation, and integrations with other SDLC tools used in the Organization and it is really easy to use. It's widely adopted and has the power to deliver what we …
GitLab's online IDE and code modification is much better compared to Stash. While pricier than Bitbucket, Gitlab also provides CI CD configuration better than BB.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
The capability of SCOM as far as monitoring Windows systems is concerned is far greater than any monitoring product out there as both are a Microsoft product so integration and discoveries work well and fast.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
This was used to monitor uor non-Windows systems and was cumbersome. Their licensing was per device with how many agents you needed; however, with System Center Operations Manager, their billing was a lot easier for their product.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
All comparative features are way expensive and complex to configure in all other competitors. Value to money and ease of deployment for Microsoft based environment
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
SCOM is better than OMi for Windows-based servers monitoring. You need to know how to use Visual Studio to customize the management pack. Dynatrace is way better for all Application Performance Manager.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
It is an excellent product for monitoring features like Exchange, Active Directory, DNS. Monitors are custom designed and can be adjusted to any system. Great monitors can be created even when monitoring open-source systems.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
SolarWinds stacks well on the ease of use with an easily installable version and highly modular (products can be added to the basic installation and are easily managed from a single endpoint. System Center Operations Manager was selected because the majority of the environment …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
We didn't consider any other alternatives, nor did we try or demo any other product prior to our purchase of SCOM. I know there are several other products out that perform many of the same functions and more such as SolarWinds, however, those products are pricey as well and we …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
HP SiteScope is truly an agentless solution, with all the limitations of such approach, SCOM also has limited functionality for agentless monitoring, but you always can switch to agent-based configuration in SCOM, but not in SiteScope. Datadog is a good cloud-based monitoring …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
Our organization currently uses Nagios and while it is a much cheaper alternative, you just don't get the features and capabilities that SCOM offers. Nagios seems to be limited to basic monitoring and alerts. SCOM is tailored to our TFS environment out of the box with the TFS …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
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 …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
The monitoring market is a really crowded one. While I think SCOM is the best solution for Microsoft-centric scenarios, competitors like Nagios or Tivoli may fit better for different expectations. Some companies with specific objectives (like ITIL management) could be pushed to …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
We only had What's Up Gold in the past. What's Up Gold could not monitor services or performance of a server. It only would ping for up and down and we also used it for some SNMP monitoring with printers. SCOM had more features and was a more robust solution.
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
SCOM naturally competes with other monitoring products on the market. It's obvious, that monitoring products, such as SQLSentry ot RedGate SQL Monitor can do specific workload monitoring better, but when you need to have centralized monitoring solution - SCOM is the best! …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
I strongly believe, SolarWinds is the leader in monitoring and managing everything/anything network related, not saying Microsoft can't develop SCOM to beat SolarWinds, but Microsoft really needs to step back and figure out how far they want to take SCOM and what's the end goal …
Chose Microsoft System Center Operations Manager (SCOM)
SolarWinds Application and Server monitoring is the right choice for many organizations. However, it does not provide the flexibility of monitoring that System Center Operations Manager provides. Smaller organizations might want to consider SolarWinds for application and server …
It is well-suited for any project that needs VCS. It's an excellent choice for teams that might be remote or have to collaborate across teams. Plenty of features allow for async working. With its dashboards and reporting features, it is also suitable for nontechnical PMs or stakeholders. It allows for very bespoke customization and can most often do much more than you need it to.
Well suited for IT Departments that can budget the funds and time needed for setup and maintenance of SCOM. The end product is well suited for medium to large environments that have 100's of resources that require monitoring and reporting. Enterprise level statistics are at your fingertips with a few clicks of a mouse after the product has been configured and agents have been deployed. As I said previously, we are a small business and I was fortunate enough to be able to budget this product into our environment. It did take us a while to configure and fully deploy, but as a result, we are well-informed and are able to extract detailed information as it pertains to usage/consumption of our workstation and server resources to include performance metrics and any errors that may arise.
SCOM can manage Windows OS systems from desktops to servers very well.
SCOM is platform agnostic in that we manage physical and virtual machines with no differentiation.
SCOM can quickly deploy emergency security patches and the best part is it can provide detailed results of success and failure rate of patch deployment.
It is a monster of a system and really needs a person managing the system full time
Options are a bit clunky especially when you need to set overrides.
Takes a lot of time and effort to setup alerts as you want them, don't rely on the out of the box options you need to invest time into the system to get what you want out of it.
Make sure you size the underlying database server/s correctly (Microsoft provide a tool to calculate based on number of objects you plan to collect data on), it is a datawarehouse underneath after all.
I really feel the platform has matured quite faster than others, and it is always at the top of its game compared to the different vendors like GitHub, Azure pipelines, CircleCI, Travis, Jenkins. Since it provides, agents, CI/CD, repository hosting, Secrets management, user management, and Single Sign on; among other features
I find it easy to use, I haven't had to do the integration work, so that's why it is a 9/10, cause I can't speak to how easy that part was or the initial set up, but day to day use is great!
I've never had experienced outages from GItlab itself, but regarding the code I have deployed to Gitlab, the history helps a lot to trace the cause of the issue or performing a rollback to go back to a working version
GItlab reponsiveness is amazing, has never left me IDLE. I've never had issues even with complex projects. I have not experienced any issues when integrating it with agents for example or SSO
At this point, I do not have much experience with Gitlab support as I have never had to engage them. They have documentation that is helpful, not quite as extensive as other documentation, but helpful nonetheless. They also seem to be relatively responsive on social media platforms (twitter) and really thrived when GitHub was acquired by Microsoft
GitHub is an inferior product from most points of view. We had to use it and the teams finds no positives about it. Everything is a downgrade from our previous GitLab solution. GitLab CI\CD is vastly superior to workflows, for example doing a manual node is just "when : manual" in GitLab while you have to do clickops in GitHub to achieve the same. No overview of code in branches is a minus when we tried to figure out what our colleagues are trying to merge as it looked off.
SolarWinds stacks well on the ease of use with an easily installable version and highly modular (products can be added to the basic installation and are easily managed from a single endpoint. System Center Operations Manager was selected because the majority of the environment is based on Windows products and it was part of the licensing agreement. It offered an easy way to consolidate the monitoring tools to provide a single point of management.
Since we are at the tail end of our POC, we have no immediate ROI to report.
That said, during the POC, we immediately identified several issues within TFS that we immediately addressed and will potentially save us hours of lost time and troubleshooting.