We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The customizable reports and dashboards are really flexible. We started this partnership with Centreon, when we were looking for a solution, because of the flexibility of the reporting. That's what we found to be most attractive in the solution. You can display the data as you want."
"The dashboards are valuable because they ease troubleshooting and viewing. It becomes easier to locate the source of a problem... The dashboards make it easier to communicate with our clients. They don't want to see the alert console, they want to see a beautiful dashboard representing their network and their business and to watch it in case something is wrong in their environment."
"The single-pane view provides us a view of all of our network infrastructure, and it is one of the most important tools that we use to see the status of our customers' networks."
"You can concentrate and orchestrate several other solutions from other vendors. You can consolidate those solutions all in one place, then maintain and monitor from that single point. This creates ease of use. It is a very powerful solution from this point of view."
"We have the business activity monitoring, the map, and the MBI modules and they are all very good."
"Centreon helps me detect where the problem is quickly. When we resolve a problem quickly, this lowers our overall costs."
"Alert aggregation was the primary requirement. BigPanda pulls all this together into a single UI for us, allowing us to see related alerts grouped together into an incident, and enables us to easily create a JIRA ticket and Slack channel to manage an issue."
"We have also made extensive use of the outbound integrations to ticketing systems (JIRA) and collaboration tools (Slack). The main driver for us has been getting all alerting into a single UI and enabling us to streamline our incident management process."
"The main thing that we like about BigPanda is the user interface."
"BigPanda integrates well with other solutions, such as WatchGuard,"
"Its compatibility with other SIEMS is very useful."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the dashboard. It's very intuitive."
"It's the completeness of the solution that we like the most."
"The initial setup isn't overly complex."
"The solution allows easy gathering and ingestion of the data."
"The scalability of the solution is amazing because it can collect a lot of data and you can have your own structure to monitor this data."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The solution has plenty of features that are good."
"During the initial setup we faced some issues. Part of it was because we had to become more knowledgeable in the solution. There are some gray areas and if you don't know the product well you may have issues. Another part of it was some bugs that we came across, although that's part of every software solution in IT nowadays. But the initial setup could be easier."
"Improvements are needed in the area of cloud monitoring, as that's a newer feature."
"Opening a ticket on the website of Centreon can be difficult for my colleague, but not for me because my English is good. However, my colleague doesn't speak English well, as our company is in Quebec and our first language is French."
"I would like to see more plugins. That is something it needs. There is also room for improvement through dynamic thresholds, or self-discover thresholds. I would also like to see a discovery feature that could map the whole network environment and automatically suggest things."
"Currently, we have to go through all of the different templates and take a look at how the template is configured, and how specific parameters may change across different templates with different precedents, megatons, etc. It's a lot of work and involves trial and error. I wish they could simplify the process."
"Centreon is actually missing an easy way to create a trendline for the metrics. Actually it is possible to create it, but you need a good knowledge of math, Centreon, and RRD."
"The cost of this product is too high compared to New Relic."
"Our infrastructure is quite large - tens of thousands of servers, often with 30-plus checks running on each host with one minute intervals. This generates a lot of data often in bursts (when we have a large scale failure). This has caused some delay in the ingestion pipeline."
"The solution could improve by having better integration."
"It needs integration with a configuration management solution."
"I'd say I am happy with the technical support, not elated. They provide great support, but sometimes they don't have the answers that I need."
"It's difficult to set up initially, and their billing model is also a bit complicated."
"The solution has a high learning curve for users. It's a little complicated when you're trying to figure out all the features and what they do."
"It needs integration with a configuration management solution."
"Its pricing model and integration with third-party services can be improved. We had faced an issue with integration. The alerting feature is currently not available with Splunk, but it is definitely available with Datadog and PagerDuty. They should include this feature. A few dashboards in Splunk look quite old and are not that modern. They aren't bad, but improving these dashboards will definitely make Splunk more attractive and usable. I read in a few blog posts that there were a few security incidents related to Splunk agents. So, it can be made more secure."
"This solution could be improved by better pricing in general and by easier installation."
"We find that the maintenance process could be a lot better."
"Their licensing model is really easy. You have one license and you have access to all the features, compared to other tools where you have to purchase add-ons."
"The pricing works out well for us, given our environment and where we are."
"If you need basic monitoring without dashboards, just monitoring, the plugins are very useful and really cheap. If you want a more complete solution with dashboards and reporting, the EMS solution is great and it is not that much more expensive. It's a good value. Really good."
"Centreon is better than Nagios XI in regards to cost and support response times, when you have a problem. If you have a problem, it costs money to contact the Nagios XI support."
"Centreon is always available to develop new plugins when needed. The most important thing is that their maintenance account yearly subscription fee includes the fact that they will maintain the new plugins that you requested them to deliver."
"They were great to work with on pricing/licensing. Given we are a high-growth company, we needed a flexible site license."
"We pay $200,000 USD per year."
"Licensing is a yearly, one-time cost."
"Our customers often complain that the price of Splunk is too high."
"This solution is costly. Splunk is obviously a great product, but you should only choose this product if you need all the features provided. Otherwise, if you don't need all the features to meet your requirements, there are probably other products that will be more cost-effective. It's cost versus the functionality requirement."
"It can be cost-prohibitive when you start to scale and have terabytes of data. Its cost model is based on how much data it processes a day. If they're able to create scaled-down niche or custom package offerings, it may help with the cost. Instead of the full-blown features, if they can narrow the scope where it can only be used for a specific purpose, it would kind of create that market for the product, and it may help with the costing. When you start using it as a central aggregator and you're pumping tons of logs at it, pretty soon, you'll start hitting your cap on what it can process a day. Once you've got that, you're kind of defeating the purpose because you're going to have to scale back."
"It's a yearly subscription."
"I think that most of the monitoring solutions are expensive."
"The solution is a little expensive."
"The price of Splunk is reasonable."
BigPanda Autonomous Operations platform helps IT Ops, NOC and DevOps teams detect, investigate, and resolve IT incidents faster and more easily than ever before. Powered by Open Box Machine Learning, BigPanda correlates IT noise into insights, automates incident management, and unifies fragmented IT operations. Customers such as Intel, TiVO, Turner Broadcasting and Workday rely on BigPanda to reduce their operating costs, improve service availability and performance, and de-risk and accelerate their digital transformation initiatives. Founded in 2012, BigPanda is backed by top-tier investors including Sequoia Capital, Mayfield, and Battery Ventures. Visit www.bigpanda.io for more information.
Splunk software has been around since 2006 and the company has since grown to become an industry leader. Splunk's vision is to make machine data accessible, usable and valuable to everybody. The company offers a wide range of products to turn machine data into valuable information by monitoring and analyzing all activities. This is known as Operational Intelligence and is the unique value proposition of Splunk.
Splunk is well-known for its Log Management capabilities and also for its Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) solutions.
BigPanda is ranked 26th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 3 reviews while Splunk is ranked 1st in Security Information and Event Management (SIEM) with 47 reviews. BigPanda is rated 8.6, while Splunk is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigPanda writes "Alert aggregation and the correlation platform are extremely useful, streamlining our incident management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Splunk writes "Good support with an intuitive dashboard but the cost is too high". BigPanda is most compared with Moogsoft, Zabbix, IBM Tivoli NetCool OMNIbus, ServiceNow and Nagios XI, whereas Splunk is most compared with Dynatrace, Datadog, IBM QRadar, ELK Logstash and Zabbix.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.