Alluvio Aternity Reviews

We are using it for user experience analysis and troubleshooting of end user problems. Down the road, we are planning to integrate it with other systems and do data mining and analytics to analyze user experience trends, then correlate and generate alerts if there are systematic problems in the user experience. We can then correlate it to the line of business, location, and the specific software causing the problem.

We previously used version 7 and are now using version 11.

It is a tool that helps me check users' computers really quickly without having a help desk administrator logging in and doing analysis. Anyone who has access to Aternity, including our support team, can log onto Aternity and do a quick, basic analysis.

You cannot see their screen. However, you can see some statistics, numbers, and performance. After you implement your custom applications, it will give information about the device itself. It can also give you information about the network and the back-end computing. From my experience, this reduces the troubleshooting time by 70 or 80 percent.

The troubleshooting is the most valuable feature because we are experiencing some issues with end user computing. It is very helpful finding out what is the root cause.

Aternity provides visibility into the employee device and application transactions all the way through to the back-end. There are applications or nonstandard applications where you have an ability to extend them to add extra information, which we are doing right now. You can clarify the information that you receive on Aternity, like your custom application. If it is web-based, then you can customize it with minimal development and get extra information about personal transactions as well as the user experience of browsing between application tabs on the browser.

In version 7, there was a separate tab for certain applications where I could open five IE Explorer instances or pathways in Chrome, which I found really useful. It had memory consumption and CPU per process. We already indicated to Aternity that it would be helpful to have this again. 

Right now, the user information being displayed by Aternity is received from AD. Ideally, we would like to see integration with other sources for user information, like other databases, so we are not limited to AD. 

I have used it for about two years.

In two years, we haven't had any problems with Aternity.

We have had no problems with scalability.

We have deployed about 2,200 licenses so far. We are planning overall to have about 8,000 to 10,000 users.

I have used the technical support a little bit. Usually, they are very good. They have been responsive and come with solutions quickly.

We didn't have this type of tool before.

I didn't set up the back-end. I only had experience with installing agents on users' machines. Installing the agents is very simple.

Another team did the setup.

There is a small group who handles any performance tools. They are not a big team.

There is definitely a return because there is a 30 percent reduction in the amount of time we spend debugging issues.

Aternity has helped us to reduce hardware refresh costs by considering the actual employee experience, rather than just the age of the employees’ devices. It has definitely been very helpful by giving us the full picture of what needs to be done. We are in this specific situation because we are doing a refresh because of another initiative. It has told us that we didn't need to replace the hardware by at least 10 percent. 

The pricing for the users and agents is reasonable compared to other solutions and vendors.

The fact that other products may provide deeper visibility into device performance doesn't concern me at all since I get so much detail regarding what I need.

It is a very powerful tool. We are still learning it.

The solution is very helpful to have. Companies look at the application monitoring and performance. Aternity gives you the ability to see end-to-end, so you just don't see applications; you see the user experience of an application. Because you could have the best application in your data center, but you might have problems accessing it. Or, if the computing devices are not optimal, they don't benefit from having fantastic applications on the back-end. So, it gives you the holistic view of your overall end-to-end journey.

I would rate the solution as an eight or nine out of 10 because of the improvements that I suggested.

We have a big number of devices and we use it to get a pulse check of how our desktops or workstations are behaving across the enterprise. We don't have it on every device. We have it scattered across all locations where we have a presence. We get metrics such as CPU information, memory utilization and, most importantly, the application performance that comes out-of-the-box with Aternity.

Let's say we release new hardware. We have a testing team and they want to see how applications will behave on that new hardware. They install Aternity and they look at the metrics — the CPU, memory utilization, and application response times. That's how a lot of our businesses use it. There's another area where we just focus on how our application is behaving. So the two core uses are hardware performance, based on a new release of hardware, and application performance, regardless of the hardware.

We used to have the on-prem Aternity solution, but now we are using their SaaS solution.

One of the features that Aternity has is the boot time. It measures how long a workstation takes from when you first power it on until the device is usable. We were able to provide our engineers and our developers that information. We've seen situations where these services are taking a longer time. These applications take up some of the CPU. We've shown them the data and they have come and said, "Okay, we can probably improve in this area."

The business or department that is responsible for that software or device can look at the actual metrics that we are able to provide and say, "Okay, this is actual data, not just anecdotal data from users who say, "My email is slow." They can act on it. That's the beauty of it, the metrics.

DEM-Q (Digital Experience Management Quadrant) is very useful. This is where they stand out with their dashboard, because it gives us a picture of how our company is doing compared to the other businesses out there. We're one of the big five or six banks in Canada. We are able to see how we are doing compared to the other financial industry companies out there. We don't want to compare ourselves to, let's say, technology companies or retail companies. We can compare ourselves with the financial industry. At the same time, we can also compare ourselves with the rest of the globe, but in our case, having that ability to compare ourselves with other financial industry companies is important.

The application monitoring is the most important feature. For example, how long does it take to open Outlook, or how long does it take to send an email or preview mail? How long does it take to open Word? When it comes to launch time, how quick is the application?  We use that for a lot of our Microsoft applications. The ability to measure response time is the best feature.

There are also built-in activities that let you measure things like preview mail, open address book, and send mail. Those are the activities that we are able to get measurements on, and those are things we have not seen in other software monitoring tools.

Aternity enables us to see exactly what employees see as they engage with apps. That means we use Aternity in a reactive mode. When we get a call to our help desk saying a machine is slow or acting up or not behaving as expected, we monitor the device for a couple of days, and then we make our diagnosis based on the reports. We use Aternity to troubleshoot user complaints.

We are waiting for the GA release of their agent. I hope they can do better when they release their endpoint agents. Right now, we are not able to measure some applications, core applications, because it's relying on a specific version of the agent and that agent has not come out yet and there's no ETA. I would like to see them speed up time to market when they release agents.

We've gone through many iterations of their software. We have been using it for at least five years.

We haven't had any outages of the SaaS environment, but what we're struggling with now is the stability of the agent. We've been using a GA version. They came out with a beta version and another beta version only to scale back and remove the beta version. Now we're back to the GA version. The back-end of the SaaS is solid. It's the connector, the agent piece, where we are struggling. I have been opening tickets with Aternity because we are not getting, rather we're losing data. Our endpoints are not reporting data the way they did before when we had a more stable version.

Because it's a SaaS version, it can easily adapt and scale. If we have 2,000 agents, we can easily scale to 10,000 and to 50,000 without having to consider the back-end. Scaling is very easy. I trust that their back-end will support when we scale up.

We are licensed for 2,000 end-points and we are currently using 1,000. We are waiting for the GA version of the agent before we can utilize the other 1,000. I don't want to use the remaining 1,000 on an unstable agent.

Aternity's technical support is excellent. When you open a case, you get a response right away. I find their technical support very responsive.

We did not have a previous solution.

The initial setup was very straightforward. We signed on with our Microsoft Azure environment and had access to the SaaS version. We got the metadata. We integrated this metadata with our Azure, set it up on our Azure side, and off we went. It's very simple.

Deployment took about two weeks, including deployment of agents. It's not just a one-day task to deploy the agents. There were multiple deployments. That included setting up the single sign-ons and the dashboard.

To manage the environment we have two people involved right now, managing the console. But when it comes to the tool for getting reports and metrics, there are about 15 to 20 people doing so in different lines of business. 

We did it ourselves, in-house.

We have seen return on our investment with Aternity. We've seen how our applications behave, especially the core applications, so we are getting a very good return on our investment.

We looked at a competitor, Lakeside SysTrack, but I found that Aternity gave more bang for our buck and it was going to give us the information that we need.

Evaluate it, look at the pros and cons, define what you're looking for and, if it fits your needs, go for it. It's a very helpful tool to have in the bag. I would highly recommend it.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using Aternity is how our core applications behave. Before, we did not have any sort of metrics. Now, we have visibility into how our applications behave so we can actually tell the owners of the applications how to improve their applications.

Aternity has its own calculation for measuring user experience. Out-of-the-box, it does measure the user experience for Microsoft Office suite and the browsers that are out there:  Microsoft Edge, IE, and Chrome. It gives you a number, and it's just a good number to see, but it doesn't really tell you the whole picture. If it gives us a rating of nine, what does that really mean?

User experience is very hard to quantify because it's an aggregate score of different measurements, but it does give you an indicator of how your applications are performing. But for me, the true metric is the response time, the actual numbers that show when the user opens Outlook that it takes three seconds. For me, that's a better definition, than a rating of one to 10, for user experience. I'm not discounting Aternity's user experience metric because that is the way their competitors do it as well.

In terms of the solution providing visibility into the employee device and into application transactions all the way through the back-end, it's "yes" and "no." The solution does provide workstation performance matrix — CPU, memory, I/O read, I/O write, and network information. For all the way to the back-end, they have another solution, an APM that we are not currently utilizing. If we integrate our Aternity with APM, that's when we'll see from endpoint all the way to the back-end. But because we don't have the integration with the APM, we only see the front-end. We don't see all the way to the server side.

Aternity hasn't helped us to reduce hardware refresh costs by considering actual employee experience rather than just the age of the employees' devices because we've always had some sort of logic for when we refresh our device. It's a three-year cycle for our desktops and a four-year cycle for our laptops. Aternity has not changed that model.

The fact that other solutions may provide deeper visibility into device performance comes down to a few factors. Price — how much that other solution costs; ease of use — how easy it is to deploy to our fleet; and the quality of data. I'm sure that there are other tools out there that can do what Aternity's doing, but in our case, we are happy. We are satisfied with the data we're getting from Aternity, with its ease of use and how agents are deployed.

The solution is used for the digital experience. It is also used for auto-remediation and reporting issues in servers. Currently, we use it only on our VDI.

Currently, we don't monitor the applications. In my previous company, we used it to monitor the applications. It helped us understand the latency of the back-end application, the client, and the network.

The response time in the application is valuable. The product can quickly analyze and see where the bottleneck is. It can identify whether it was on the network, the back end, or the client side. It is pretty good.

The solution’s user monitoring features help us to have a quicker time to resolve. It also prevents us from having 20 different teams on a call. We know which team to contact. We do not waste resource time. The dashboard is very effective. We can easily identify issues that come up.

Integrating the tool with other products is a challenge. We didn't have the time to work with the integration. The integration must be improved. There are so many different monitoring tools out there. It becomes challenging to have too many different dashboards.

I have been using the solution for two and a half years. I am using the latest version of the solution.

I did a POC on Alluvio, Nexthink, and ControlUp. Alluvio came out on the top.

I will recommend the tool to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use Alluvio Aternity for digital experience monitoring. 

The solution is cloud-based SaaS.

Alluvio Aternity has multiple use cases.

The licensing model doesn't suit the market we are in and has room for improvement.

I have been using Alluvio Aternity for one year.

Alluvio Aternity is stable.

Alluvio Aternity is scalable. The organization had around 4,000 people using the solution.

The initial setup is straightforward. We, as the managed service provider, were involved in the deployment process, which took approximately one week with the assistance of one engineer.

We helped the client implement Alluvio Aternity in-house.

I thought the price for Alluvio Aternity was reasonable, but we had difficulty selling it in our market due to the minimum number of agents required for deployment, which I believe was around 500. Many of our customers operate with fewer than 500 agents, so the product did not fit well within that lower market segment, even though it could have been beneficial for them.

I give Alluvio Aternity an eight out of ten.

I believe that Alluvio Aternity is a useful product for diagnosing issues and locating problem areas. However, it may not be suitable for all potential customers, particularly those who require fewer than 500 licenses or prefer a monthly billing option. This pricing model may not be compatible with the current MSP model. While I find it challenging to market to my customer base due to the license threshold, I still believe that Alluvio Aternity is a good product. If the license limit was not a factor, I would be able to sell it to many other customers easily using a SaaS-based pricing model.

As a bank we have a lot of retail branches, and we especially rely on Aternity for helping us do fault domain isolation across our infrastructure and in the end-user space. We can understand relative performance between different remote locations, and we can understand, within a user profile, when there are hardware issues and when there may be software issues. We use it in our corporate offices as well, but we really see the focus being around when a branch user is having a problem. 

We're not as mature as some organizations so that we don't have a full, proactive reporting and alerting built through Aternity yet, but that's on our agenda for the near-term, in the next three to six months.

We deployed it in our own AWS space. It's not on-prem, but it's also not SaaS.

When we converted Windows 7 to Windows 10, we were able to isolate some issues. Aternity pointed out that there needed to be changes in the VDI. We needed more memory to be allocated. It wasn't necessarily clear just from the specs from Microsoft, but it became clear as we migrated people over, with a before-and-after view within Aternity.

When employees complain of trouble with applications or devices, Aternity enables us to see exactly what they see as they engage with apps. That allows us to focus our troubleshooting. Fault domain isolation is the difficult problem. Knowing where the problem is 75 percent of fixing the problem, or even more than that. Aternity helps us know where the problem is. We can compare different branches, we can compare different users, and we can compare different applications to help us determine what the common factors are.

The most valuable features are the ability to 

• separate machine issues from software issues 
• build custom monitoring of our own homegrown or non-standard applications.

As a financial institution, we have a lot of applications that are either written internally or bought from a vendor and customized for us. Having a tool that lets us monitor specific transactions in those applications allows us to focus on the transactions that are important to the business. We find it valuable to be able to see what's going on with the hardware and look at standard applications like Outlook or Teams or Office applications. Those provide a comparison point and let us separate out hardware versus software issues. 

The custom monitoring is where we really do see a lot of value.

We don't feel that we get the back-end transaction details from Aternity. We have other tools that do that.

Also, there is room for improvement in the granularity of the alerting and reporting. We would like to be able to alert on a defined set of users for a given application, for example, that all users in this group who are using this application are seeing low performance. And we would like it to provide comparisons of that to other users in a similar group that are not experiencing the issue. We would like the ability to alert and report on those types of specifics. I don't necessarily know what all the parameters are that I might want to use to slice that data, but our experience has been that within Aternity it's not always as granular as it needs to be. 

Version 11, with the Tableau reporting, offers some promise there. We're only a couple of weeks into Version 11, so we haven't fully implemented it. But that's something we're looking to improve with our new version, moving forward. 

The other place for improvement, as an on-prem, non-SaaS customer, is that the system administration and management in Aternity are very difficult. They've even told me that most of their support calls come in due to configuration and system administration on their on-prem. Their on-prem solution is not easy to use. I know it's not their focus, but for now they still have us and a lot of other customers using it, and they could improve that, rather than forcing wholesale, brand-new builds.

We've had Aternity for six years.

The stability has been good. When we were running version 9, we did not have a lot of problems. We've run into a few applications that were affected by the agent so that we had to not use the agent on some of our very specific, custom-built apps. The Aternity agent somehow interacted with them to the point where the application did not work. But stability-wise, in general, nothing has changed.

Their design is pretty scalable from what we've seen. Before I was involved with the product, people did take it from just a couple of thousand agents up to 10,000, and now we're over 20,000 agents, without too much trouble. It does scale. I've talked to other companies that have hundreds of thousands of agents.

We do not have all our business-critical applications in there. It's also not just a few. We were waiting because we just upgraded to Version 11. We are looking to now go more broadly into other applications. Certainly, the most critical applications are in there.

We have plans to increase our usage. We have a mandate to start using it more for proactive monitoring and to increase the footprint, the number of applications, that we're looking at.

Aternity's technical support is average. We had to push to get the right people and resources engaged from the back-end technical. I found that a lot of the support required us to wait for an email response. We've pushed our account team and they did respond and help with that somewhat, but in general I've seen better and I've seen worse than the Aternity support, in the tech world.

Previous to this, there wasn't really a tool that gave visibility into the end-user device experience at this level. We had related solutions from Dynatrace that would look at the back-end system performance and the front-end user experience as users connected to the servers in the data center. But they didn't look at what was happening on the desktop and how the end-user really perceived that webpage loading or that Outlook item coming in.

The initial setup was complex. There are multiple servers involved in the management system and getting those servers to interact properly — getting them configured so that the management system, the aggregation servers, and the database all communicated properly, all shared certificates properly, and had the proper certificates installed for the API — all of those pieces were difficult. There was a lot of stuff that was not straightforward in our implementation.

Our upgrade from version 9 to version 11 took three months to get the new servers built and configured correctly, tested, load balancers built, etc. That was with Aternity support, so it was not a straightforward implementation.

In terms of an implementation plan, going to version 11 we built a development environment in AWS, completely separate from our existing version 9 production environment. We got that working and then replicated it into production and then deployed part of the solution alongside the current version 9 before we finally upgraded the full system to version 11.

Internally, on our admin side, there are three IT folks who work on Aternity.

What I'm spending versus what I'm getting is a little high, especially as I explore the possibility of moving into their SaaS solution. But I think we have had return on our investment. We had some struggles under the older version, struggles that version 11 seems to be fixing. If we get to the place where we are proactively alerting and where we're giving better reporting, both of which are available in the new version, then we'll absolutely be getting return on our investment from our on-prem.

In my opinion they are asking a lot for their SaaS solution, but I also know that that's the direction they're going. They seem like they're on the high side for what they're providing, but we're not fully implemented. We've got some room for growth. As we grow into using Aternity more, I would hope that we'll be able to do that with costs staying flat. Then it would become more of a return on investment.

Their pricing is a little high. Their pricing model has changed from the old style — and all companies are doing this — the older perpetual license plus maintenance, to more of a subscription-based service. They're pricing their subscription a little high right now.

The current, on-prem solution is probably a fair price. I need to get more value out of it, so that's where I hesitate a little bit. But especially in the SaaS world, when I looked at some of the pricing, I was a bit taken aback.

At the time, we did not look at other solutions. I wasn't managing the team that runs Aternity at the time Aternity was chosen. I don't know for sure what else they looked at. We have looked briefly at other solutions in the past, after having already had Aternity in place, and have not chosen to take it out, at least not yet.

My advice would be to push the support people to help you. Engage the vendor early in the process, via Pro Services or via the support, to help with the implementation. Aternity support requires you to press a little bit to get what you want. If you want to get support, you have to engage them strongly and be very assertive.

Have a solid list of objectives for what applications and what activities you want to have monitored. It's easy to get lost in "Let's look at everything" without understanding what your key, business-critical functions are. Have a top-10, top-20, top-50 list of activities and attack them that way. That's been a bit of a weakness in our implementation.

The fact that other products may provide deeper visibility into device performance does not concern us. We've had very few cases, to date, that have required any deeper level of device performance metrics.

Right now I would rate Aternity at about a seven out of 10, and with the potential to go right up to an eight-and-a-half or nine if we get our version 11 implementation completed the way we're planning.

Because we are in retail, we have a lot of store-facing applications and they have some performance issues. We really want to know how an application is behaving at the endpoint, from the end-user perspective. We support Microsoft Teams, SharePoint, and all the Microsoft SaaS products.

If a user was having any issues they used to call us. After we installed Aternity it helped by sending advanced alerts so we can proactively look at the issues, whether it's an issue with the PC, the network, or the back-end. It's a nice tool.

The solution provides metrics about actual employee experience with business-critical apps. We have used this feature to measure employee experience before and after changes to applications, in a few cases. Microsoft products are in the cloud and Microsoft releases a lot of changes. Teams is an example, as is SharePoint. They release a lot of patches and we were able to see them, before and after. We chose a nice graphic to show the before and after for the response time. I like this response-time graph. It's very useful and beneficial for any code changes.

It also helps to reduce hardware refresh costs by considering the actual employee experience, rather than just the age of employees' devices. In our teams, a lot of people are complaining about an issue with device memory. The recommended amount is 8 GB to 16 GB. People who have 8 GB are complaining. But looking at the PC, it's not just a RAM issue. It may be due to other challenges, issues with the back-end or network. It depends, in each case. But we can really see, if we run a report on those running 8-GB-memory PCs, whether there is good performance or not. Maybe one or two of those PCs are not doing well, but the remaining ones are good. I don't have details on how much it has saved us in refresh costs, but we have around 200 PCs and upgrading all 200 PCs' memory with 16 GB or 32 GB could cost a lot. It's not viable for any company to upgrade each and every PC's memory.

When employees complain of trouble with applications or devices, Aternity enables us to see exactly what they see as they engage with apps. In fact, we get advanced notice. So rather than the user complaining, we get to know in advance and will see what the hiccups are. We can correlate the user experience. It makes troubleshooting easy. At a high level, the application support teams who don't know much about coding can tell if it is an issue with the data center or the back-end network. It can tell them the root cause at a high level. And if there is any outage it will also tell them that. If the application is down, they'll know how long it's been down. It mainly plots out a graph and shows what time it started, what time it ended, how many users were impacted, and how many business locations were impacted.

We can look into a lot more details about Microsoft Teams, specifically the audio or the video, and we can look at network stats on it.

The most valuable feature is the alerting. As soon as we click on an incident, it takes us directly to the problematic PC. It's a direct solution. We click on an alert and it takes us to the incident details. The details show in different colors, in a graphical representation, and I like that the most. 

To give an example, we have a SharePoint portal and we configured about 15 banners. If any one of them is breaching the threshold of the number of users, any support person can easily click the incident and nail what the root cause is by looking at the graphical representation. It may be the network or another issue.

There are a lot more features for troubleshooting and monitoring and a few other tabs are available, nicely presented. 

The beauty of this product is that it does support desktop. I've seen a lot of products and they have synthetic monitoring, but they're not real-time. Aternity is real-time and it covers desktop applications. An APM may not help, but a real end-user solution like this is helping us with any issues on the desktop. The thin client is running on the local machine, so we need to know what's happening at the end-user machine. This is another one of the features I like. 

Another nice feature is that we can customize a lot of dashboards using Tableau.

Maybe they could extend coverage. Right now it is only for mobile, desktop, and web. If they could extend it to point-of-sale devices, that would be helpful. For example, your local floral shop has a scanner. I want to know what the performance of that device is like. It may be slow. Or when you go to pump gas and the screens are slow, these are the kinds of point-of-sale that we could start troubleshooting. That would be a nice feature.

Also, when it comes to what is called creating signatures, it's not easy for a non-coding person for desktop applications. You need to run the recording and you need to have some exposure and knowledge. That is an area where they can improve. For web applications, they have the Web Activity Creator and that's an awesome and easy tool. Anybody can use it and capture the signatures. With the desktop applications it's a little more cumbersome and difficult.

Aternity provides visibility into the employee device and into application transactions all the way through the back-end, but it does not support that at a high level. It's not really detailed, but for support people it is helpful so that they can tell if the problem is with the end-user PC, the network, or maybe the back-end. But when you talk about the Waterfall details, it's not providing any. If they could include that, it would be great.

I have been using Aternity for about one-and-a-half years.

It is stable. I haven't seen any issues, other than a few outages. They were able to fix them on-the-fly.

Scaling is very easy because it's a SaaS product. If you want to add more endpoints, it's easily achievable. In terms of increasing deployment it all depends how you're going to handle it: manual or automated. On a scale of one to 10, scaling is a seven to eight. It's easily scalable.

We currently have 200 users, meaning 200 stores. But we have about 3,000 stores. Even if there are only two or three pieces per store, that would be around 10,000 endpoints.

Maintenance is very minimal. One person is more than enough for maintaining 1,000 or even 10,000. The development is a one-time effort, and after that it is all maintenance. It's just administration: installing the endpoints, making sure endpoints are talking to each other, and configuring any new applications.

Their support is good. They respond on time.

The transition from Riverbed was smooth. Aternity was acquired by Riverbed and now it's a different entity. But we didn't see any difficulty or hiccups. The transition was easy and I haven't seen any difference in the support, other than that the support portals were all changed. Riverbed has its own URL.

We used AppDynamics, but it's purely for application performance from the data center, not the end-user. We did not have any tool and we had a lack of end-user visibility.

We tried synthetic monitoring. It's like there is a PC sitting and running a few scripts at several intervals. But if there is an issue and we want to get real-time stats, synthetic monitoring lacks that. For example, if the network seems to be good at 10 o'clock and the back-end and PC seems to be good, but at 11 o'clock the network is slow, you only know the 10 o'clock stats. At 11 o'clock you don't know what happened. Aternity has 

• real-time monitoring
• very good alerting 
• ServiceNow integration. 

Setting up the process is very straightforward. All you need to do to install is double click a link. The user does that. And from an admin perspective, it's very easy for web applications. You directly punch in a URL and it can monitor based on the thresholds.

The complexity is only with the desktop application configuration and we need to do that to capture business activities. It requires some expertise. It's not as easy for someone from the support team. You need some development knowledge.

Because this is SaaS, it's not on-prem, all you need to do is procure the license. For the endpoints you can do it manually or use automation. The time it takes to deploy depends on the number of endpoints. We use Radia to deploy to 200 endpoints and do any upgrades. It's a straightforward process. It also depends on the number of applications. For one application and between 100 and 500 endpoints, it might take four weeks or so.

Some customization may be needed and that has to be done by Aternity's SaaS team. For example, if you want to do location mapping or fast tenant configuration for Microsoft Teams, there is a process for talking to any external SaaS tenant. We had to do some customization on this, importing certificates.

We have not seen ROI on a large scale because we are planning to go with this on a large scale. We are just doing 200 endpoints. But it is definitely helping us.

Pricing depends on the number of endpoints. With only 200 endpoints, which is what we have, it may be a little expensive. But I think pricing is negotiable; that's what I heard from sales.

There are other products for this kind of functionality, but for our use case there is no such tool because we are directly looking at the user PC, rather than comparing how much detail someone else might give us. If you are having an issue, I am looking directly at your PC and seeing what happened during that time frame. I can see resource consumption on the PC for that process; Aternity's resource consumption data is very good. And it also has basic remediation, such as restarting the process, emptying the recycle bin. We haven't done much, but there are so many features available.

We tried Microsoft monitoring itself and AppDynamics synthetic monitoring and there was one more product that we did a PoC with as well. Other solutions we looked into were not real-time monitoring solutions and that's the primary reason that we selected Aternity.

I would definitely recommend this product if you're looking to get on-time, real-time alerts from the end-user point of view. Your application may be good with hosting in Azure or AWS, but when it comes to the end-user, it's important to know how your application is behaving. What is the performance like? What is the user interaction like with your application?

It is not only for monitoring. At an enterprise level, the 10,000-foot overview, we can see a lot more details. We can generate a lot more stats for the enterprise. We can see the software inventory and how long it has been in use. For example, if anybody is using Microsoft Visio or Word, the licensed products, we can decide to move them from inventory and save some money. We can also look at how the Macs are performing compared to Windows. We can run queries and it can generate a lot more data about the end-user.

We are dependent on Aternity. We get daily alerts and they help my administration team and my support team a lot. They get to know things in advance and that way they can isolate the problem and start working on it.

I would rate the solution at eight out of 10. The two points that I'm not giving it are because a little development knowledge is required for configuring desktop applications, and to create some dashboards you need some Tableau knowledge. It doesn't require much scripting; it's easy, drag-and-drop, but people should be aware that some development knowledge is required for creating advanced dashboards.

The overarching value of the tool is its real-time accuracy, down to the user/host level. We use it for the front-line aspect which is so often discussed in the Aternity videos, or more specifically, to triage issues as they occur and determine whether the main problem is application, host, or network related.

The most valuable features for us are the Incident Management dashboard, Application Status dashboard, and Activity Analysis UI.

The only thing I can say which has been frustrating are the Tableau workspace/dashboard options out-of-the-box, at least prior to version 8. A simple example: the US map can be ¼ of the dashboard, but there's no out-of-the-box full-screen US map which can show minor/major data points for business locations. And the ¼ screen widget of the US map is, of course, not by default expandable to the full screen. A trifle for sure, but annoying. I think

We've had no issues with stability.

We've had no scalability issues from a pure agent-volume standpoint. However, the memory and CPU requirements of the Tableau server (also hosts the Tableau Aternity Gateway daemon) cannot be underestimated. 12GB of RAM and quad-core CPU was not sufficient.

We go through an Aternity business partner -- J9 Tech -- who is absolutely outstanding. In the cases where they have to open their own internal tickets with Aternity, the support is truly the best I’ve seen in my 18 years traveling, consulting, and fixing complex software issues across many different vendors. The degree to which Aternity customer support is proactive is off the charts. And the skill, speed, and precision of the technical support from both their implementation services team as well as their development team in Tel Aviv is simply par excellence — the best by a mile and in a class by itself.

We use NetIQ (base Windows host resource monitoring), HP’s BPM (synthetic trans scripting), and some of IBM’s ITCAM for Robotic Response Time, and we actually continue to use them for various business units which are accustomed to them. None have the level of granularity possible with Aternity for event/end-user monitoring or the level of real-time precision.

The initial setup was very straightforward -- three-tier arch with all communications occurring upstream (Management Server implements agent config changes by touching a file to the aggregation servers -- tier2 -- which is then picked up not by a downcall to the agent, but by an upcall from the agent to the Agg server). Thus, network and firewall issues are vastly simplified.

We did both with J9 Tech, the aforementioned Aternity business partner, as well as some in-house help from yours truly and a few colleagues.

Our ROI is not nearly as much as it could be as we’re only now getting our internal customers to use it for more than just triaging incidents or real-time problem analysis. Alerting, incident management, and reporting are woefully under-utilized as of yet for us.

It’s a little on the costly side, but if you license intelligently, accounting for your various hosts connecting in through VDI or terminal servers, you can make it well worth your money. The product quality will speak for itself.

I wasn’t involved before the P.O. was signed, but I hear we narrowed very quickly to Aternity based on recommendations like this one which we received from other prior customers.

Definitely ensure your internal customers/constituents are fully on board before rollout—network route and firewall issues can plague what should otherwise be a smooth deployment. Once deployment is complete you will be amazed how quickly valid, actionable data comes out of the UI.

The application response time. That's what our business has been having a problem with.

It hasn't improved the way it functions. It has improved the ability to troubleshoot on the backend.

When maneuvering between certain applications, it might have been slow, but it was actually not the system. It was the associate that was slow. It's caused a little bit of a training change for us.

• Dashboards and reporting features: They are not user-friendly
• Reports were a lot easier in the older versions
• They need to revamp their whole sales, management, and technical support. Their technology is fine. It's the associates around it that make it not worth my while.

I have been using Aternity for two years.

We have not had stability issues.

Scalability is fine.

We have had a little bit of help from them. I am not too impressed, to be honest. I would give them a rating of 2/5, because they don't respond very quickly.

We've talked to sales reps and we've talked to managers. We didn't talk directly to a technical manager, but we had problems with communication as a whole from the company, whether it's technical support, sales, or management.

We didn't have a previous solution.

The implementation was pretty straightforward. There were no problems.

Pricing is a bit high. Don't take that as the "be all, end all".

I have not had any training yet, so I really can't commit to that. The newer version is a lot harder than the older version. We didn't need training with the older version. That's why we didn't do it. That's why I'm saying training is key for this.

The training that I think everybody should take on creating signatures. Don't rely on them to create your signatures. It takes way too long and costs way too much.

I can't remember the name of the product we evaluated. There were only two out there at the time and Gardner recommended one of them.

Have the right training upfront. That's really about it.