Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

We used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for network monitoring until I was no longer with the institution.

It expedited processes by allowing us to graphically see where issues were occurring and track them in real-time, which improved our efficiency. It also empowered entry-level technicians by enabling them to respond to incidents without direction.

The ability to view configurations in plain text and gather all device configurations was very handy. We appreciated the dashboard statistics for identifying problem areas and found the logical topology maps to be helpful. Auvik Core's ease of use also enhanced troubleshooting speed and efficiency.

We were unable to integrate Auvik with a geographical map, which limited our ability to track issues to specific buildings on campus. Compared to other products like SolarWinds, Auvik needs a similar feature. Additionally, the cost was high.

I was involved with Auvik for just under two years.

The quality and speed of Auvik's customer support were excellent. They were knowledgeable and responded quickly with accurate and useful information.

Positive

We have used SolarWinds. The main difference is Auvik provides a high-level network topology by default and has a better graphical interface. However, SolarWinds has a comparable dashboard at a high level.

The initial setup involved placing the collector on a server and sending it up to the cloud. It was straightforward.

Two people were required to implement Auvik.

Auvik is pricey, and we were paying a lot for it, especially when compared to SolarWinds.

We considered SolarWinds as it has comparable features.

Auvik offers free training to become an Auvik Certified Professional, which is highly recommended.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for network monitoring, packet pushing for updates as well as troubleshooting and backups.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) provides a real-time image of the network and a good breakdown as to what's connected to what, and how the information is being transferred between each item or device on that network. 

Automated documentation is very good for reporting changes or network issues that may have occurred or even allowing for proper backups and situational awareness. It's quite intuitive on that aspect. Some network monitoring software don't actually keep a record or have that documentation to preview, and Auvik does, which is very useful.

In terms of visibility, there is a limited view, but that's only because other software have more integrated accesses. Auvik does quite a lot for itself.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) has decreased a whole lot of time and allotment because of how useful it is and the automated features.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) is really good for monitoring network issues and troubleshooting. When it comes to troubleshooting, Auvik is quite easy. It's very nice, and it does tell us exactly where the issue is, and we can follow the trail back to wherever it may or whatever device may be causing the issue. It's great when it comes to doing that.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) has a pretty good impact on reducing network related issues, and it's quite fundamental for most IT companies if they're trying to set up multiple different locations or assets.

Automated alerts from Auvik Network Management (ANM) were very useful when it came to limiting support tickets because it provided enough information that we could review in a few seconds any issues that may have occurred and provided fairly documented information and reports. It made our job much easier on a good percentage of the tasks compared to other software that we also ran side by side.

A lot of the automated features and reporting of Auvik Network Management (ANM) made things a whole lot easier. We were able to monitor things a little bit more in detail. We weren't looking around for what happened or what's going on there. It was quite great in that aspect.

We could see its benefits pretty quickly. It didn't take very long to pick it up. It is automated.

One of the features we appreciated the most about Auvik Network Management (ANM) was the auto mapping of the networks and quick and easy installation. It was very informative and allowed us to view things such as when networks and information were becoming bottlenecked by other resources. It was very useful for alternative aspects, such as monitoring a network whenever it went down or came back up, and it allowed us to have a really good user interface. 

The user interface of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is quite intuitive. It was very detailed. Generally, it was very user-friendly. 

The network map can become quite cramped if there are too many devices connected to one access port at the same time. It may become a little bit harder because of how compiled it would be. However, a lot of the businesses we worked with had already very structured devices and setups, so we didn't have as much congestion. I could see how that would be an issue.

They can implement a more collective network mapping to help reduce any congestive features. When it came down to many of the companies we worked with, their networks were already pre-structured, so we didn't have as much congestion. Given the fact that I could see how that would be an issue, maybe there would be a better way they could collapse or compile the network mapping issues.

I used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for approximately 2 years in my earlier company.

There was a time that I did see a little bit of instability but that was mostly regarding electrical interferences in specific areas due to weather concerns. Auvik's automated reporting system also details interferences or any lagging other than outside interference from electrical sources. I never saw Auvik itself have any glitching or issues within the software.

Surprisingly, I have not had to contact the technical support of Auvik Network Management (ANM), which is awesome.

Neutral

For network monitoring, we also used vSphere as an alternative to Auvik Network Management (ANM). Generally, that's more of a portal access or integrated access into software or into a device in comparison to a network outside view. It had similar aspects where we could see the device, the upkeep, and the network control and troubleshoot issues. However, it was much much easier to review the information from Auvik compared to going into vSphere. 

We had Bitdefender as another solution, but that's more of an antivirus software. It does have a little bit of network monitoring, but it was mostly defensive software rather than networking.

The deployment of an Auvik Network Management (ANM) device or deploying the software into a device is super easy. A lot of the setup is automated, so it was really great. It was fast to deploy, so it's great software. It was much better than most of the other things that I've had to deploy. 

Time required depends on the network. If it's a small network, it might take about 5 minutes. If it's a larger and more complex network with more setups, it might take about 15 to 30 minutes. 

As far as maintenance is concerned, we didn't have much to do with the maintenance of Auvik itself. However, we did do monitoring services, such as monitoring the networks to make sure that there were no issues with Auvik and the software itself. We never experienced any issues where we had to do any re-upkeep or re-installation.

We only need one person to deploy Auvik Network Management (ANM) or to deploy one of the Auvik Network Management (ANM) accesses.

I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) a solid nine out of ten. It is a very easy to use software. It's great. It's good for setting up and monitoring a network. It does have its limitations. It's not going to let you port into a device in case of an issue, but it will let you go ahead and troubleshoot, monitor, and review. It has great documentation and good upkeep. It doesn't have any lagging, and it's pretty solid software.

I use Auvik Network Management (ANM) when I go in to do a discovery for an environment. 

We are a technology partner with Auvik Network Management (ANM), so we use Auvik Network Management (ANM) and implement it for certain customers.

I use a number of tools. One is Network Detective, which does an actual scan of the network from a server perspective, users, etc. It doesn't do a very good job on the network gear, whereas Auvik Network Management (ANM) does an incredible job of inventorying, port-to-port management of anything that's in that environment from a network perspective. All six layers are covered under Auvik Network Management (ANM). It has become a pretty interesting tool for monitoring network traffic and network equipment. 

I have it now integrated with Halo, so if something blips on the network, it triggers an alert into Halo to have that looked at. I've been able to get the integration with Halo done; I called them, and they had it done two weeks later, fully integrated. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is there to protect your infrastructure network. It gives you three-dimensional drawings that are dynamic; when you change the cable from one port to another, it actually shows up on the drawing on the screen. Many companies are using Auvik Network Management (ANM) to monitor their network, using SentinelOne for the endpoint management, and if they're manufacturing, they might be looking at SAP or Odoo. I'm just learning Odoo right now. We're looking at the same as why we're replacing ServiceNow with Halo; we're looking at replacing SAP with Odoo for organizations that just can't afford to keep up.

I've not used the automated documentation capabilities of Auvik Network Management (ANM). I don't pull the reports per se because I feed everything back to Halo. Auvik Network Management (ANM) would be primarily used by an MSP, and they'd be using that for their clients and then billing the client so much per endpoint. I use it because I want to get a really good visual of the network. Almost every single investigation that I do, assessment, I use three or four different tools, including Auvik Network Management (ANM). Network visibility is obviously important to me because I need to know what the age of the firewall is, the switches, are they underpowered, are they under warranty, and is there a support contract in place. Because if you have a firewall that's not being patched regularly, then you've got a huge security risk. 

The real-time performance insight is crucial, and Auvik Network Management (ANM) has significantly contributed to this by monitoring every single port on every single device. If someone attempts to hack into the network, they will likely target the firewall. The system will detect such attempts and send an alert. This allows you to shut down that specific port or access point. Additionally, it identifies open ports in the firewall that shouldn’t be accessible. I create a risk register report that consolidates information from various tools into a one-page summary. For example, if there is an attempt to breach the firewall from a location like Russia, it gets marked as a risk. I can then manage a ticket for it in Halo, and possibly make adjustments in Central. I also ensure that the workstation has the appropriate endpoint protection. Furthermore, I can compile a dashboard displaying all the tools on a single screen. Overall, I have found the support team to be very helpful, and they are based in Waterloo, Ontario.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) provides an extremely intuitive interface that supports ease of use. There is no learning curve per se. The only difficulty might be getting the actual agents on the hardware, but it out of the box will do configuration backup of a firewall, which is a really useful function. I've been following that company since there was a guy in Ottawa who sold his company to Cisco for 500 million, and he started Auvik Network Management (ANM).

Auvik Network Management (ANM) provides a network map along with its dashboard that gives me a real-time picture of my network. We know all the drivers need to be installed, what firmware needs to be running, what the traffic is, what the CPU usage is, and the firewall. The way that I've got it mapped out is if Auvik Network Management (ANM) detects that a piece of critical equipment is getting too much utilization, then it will trigger an alert. It's also great for network visibility, knowing what the age of the firewall is, the switches, if they are underpowered, under warranty, and if there's a support contract in place. Network traffic monitoring, three-dimensional drawings, real-time performance insights, and port-to-port management are particularly valuable.

The network map and dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) are a little bit tricky at the beginning, so people aren't trying to just steal a copy. There are some tokens that have to go back and forth, and that's just so that you can't scan somebody's network easily. You have to have credentials to the firewall in order to properly manage it. Once it's done though, it's a breeze, with a very nice interface.

I've dealt with this product since it first came out, approximately 10 years ago.

I've primarily interacted with my sales representative, so I've never really needed to call tech support. They do offer a "white glove" service for new customers, where consultants help with full implementation, but I haven't had the need to contact tech support much.

Overall, I have good impressions of their service. The quality of customer support is a key reason I choose to use these tools. I only work with companies that provide excellent tech support and phone support. For instance, I recently started using another product called RoboShadow, which doesn't offer a phone number but allows me to reach them through Microsoft Teams anytime, and I'm okay with that. 

Positive

Auvik Network Management (ANM) pricing or licensing is about 2,500 per year for approximately 4,000 endpoints, which is quite reasonable.

I constantly analyze and monitor the market for the best tools available. I don't add anything to my toolset unless I've identified it as the best option. There might be some overlap among products, but Auvik doesn't perform the same functions as SentinelOne, and SentinelOne doesn't do what Halo does, nor does Halo replicate what Microsoft offers. Combining all that data into one logical report is critical for me. For example, one significant difference between SentinelOne and Microsoft is that Microsoft will never analyze the network or look for threats from devices that don’t have Microsoft software installed. That’s a considerable gap. On the other hand, SentinelOne can be installed on various devices, including Internet of Things (IoT) devices, which is an advantage. You could have a workstation in a remote location, like a construction site, that isn't connected to the internet, yet it's still protected. The SentinelOne agent runs in memory, continuously monitoring for malicious software installations based on the last policies applied, even without an internet connection. In contrast, Microsoft's products require a connection to their backend to function properly, meaning that Microsoft Defender won't be effective without that connection.

Additionally, SentinelOne can be installed on various platforms, including Linux, MacOS, and Android, and it even supports versions going back to Windows 7. This means you can still manage and protect devices in older environments effectively. SentinelOne does a great job of patch management, notifying you when software, like Google products, needs to be upgraded due to a lack of security support.

Auvik takes a different approach, allowing you to generate reports on every single device. It can indicate when the firmware needs upgrading and offers backup functionalities, such as saving the configuration of a firewall within the Auvik tool, which is something other tools may not provide. In summary, Auvik should be compared more to products like ConnectWise, Kaseya, and NinjaRMM, which focus on patch management and device reporting

Once you have it installed on your laptop, you simply run the application, which will bring you into a new environment. If needed, you can obtain the credentials for their firewalls and similar components. The scan will initiate, and the dashboard will begin to display information.

Managed Service Providers (MSPs) would use the application differently. They would deploy the Auvik collector, which remains on their customers' computers, creating a multi-tenant environment. I’m not an MSP anymore, but I’ve noticed that many MSPs are transitioning from products like ConnectWise to alternatives such as Auvik, SentinelOne, and Halo. In fact, I will begin training next week with a company that is currently implementing Halo as part of their PSA (Professional Services Automation) offering for managed services.

I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) a perfect 10 out of 10.

My use case for Auvik Network Management (ANM) has been network management, as the company I was with at the time had a lot of networks and networks that they didn't even know existed. They hadn't had IT in 10 years, so we had to do a little bit of network management and I had to find all their switches, IPs, and things like that. 

Auvik Network Management (ANM) was an excellent tool for that. Being able to hone in on networks by just putting it on the DC server and sending out those pings really allowed me to build a network. I

appreciate the ability to log in to different switches with the click of a button, using the SNMP map and having that login information there, because it allows you to skip going through each IP individually and trying to log in manually.

The interface of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is by far the easiest to use. I've worked with ThousandEyes, I've worked with ELK, and Auvik Network Management (ANM) was the better option, easily. The interface is straight and dry, and I appreciate the fact that when I started using it, I got a chance to see that physical, visual mapping of all my switches and what they're connected to. The dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) gives me full network visibility without needing other software; I didn't have too many problems with the dashboard overall, and it was quite good. 

The network visibility provided by Auvik Network Management (ANM) is very important for my company because we want to be able to detect and address issues efficiently. One thing that ThousandEyes has over Auvik Network Management (ANM) is that it can detect bottlenecks faster, identifying what causes network space to clutter. Auvik Network Management (ANM) does something similar, but not as in-depth as ThousandEyes.

I had thought about requesting an AI interface for Auvik Network Management (ANM), but I think they already have that now. The only issue I see is that the pricing was a bit much for our needs; if they could break it down into specific pricing points to be more affordable for larger companies, that would help, as getting that through the budget team was challenging.

I have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) for about a year and a half in my career.

I haven't seen any problems with stability using Auvik Network Management (ANM), such as lagging, crashing, or downtime.

The scalability of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is excellent, rating at the highest level possible.

I did have to contact customer support for Auvik Network Management (ANM), and it was difficult to try to get in touch with the sales representatives. They have a general number along with personal numbers that some of them call from. One representative, Josh, was really good and fantastic; I just didn't have his number. I had to call regular support, which was challenging to get to the specific representative I wanted. However, when I did reach him, he was great.

The deployment process and installation of Auvik Network Management (ANM) were great. The fact that they walk you through a demo on how to set it up was amazing. It was straightforward; you just install it on your DC server, and it sends out all the pings to different servers or switches and routers to gather information. As long as you have the correct login, you're good.

When comparing Auvik Network Management (ANM) and ThousandEyes, I prefer Auvik Network Management (ANM) because I prefer the interface. The interface is easier to understand and use—there aren't many extra tidbits to go through. You can just get straight to the data, click on a device, and configure it if needed. I found ThousandEyes more difficult to use.

I was managing one plant on the East Coast with Auvik Network Management (ANM) and I managed to possibly get one in another state, without any significant issues. It can be cluttered if you manage around 700 sites, but for smaller scale, it works perfectly. 

It took me about a day to fully understand how to use Auvik Network Management (ANM), so the learning curve was quite manageable. 

For maintenance as an end user, there are no updates required on their end, but it does inform me when I need to update and configure policies on switches and routers. I actually had to do that on a firewall as well. 

I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) overall as 20 out of 10.

We use Auvik Network Management primarily for network purposes, including monitoring and optimizing alerts. It provides an easy-to-use interface that is user-friendly, even for those who may not be familiar with navigating network platforms.

Auvik Network Management is user-friendly and intuitive. It simplifies troubleshooting network issues and provides a real-time picture of the network through its dashboard. 

The features support ease of use, making it accessible even for new users. Its proactive monitoring and simplified troubleshooting have significantly impacted our efficiency in handling network management tasks.

The network maps can be confusing due to the wide scope of the network, making it difficult to find specific details. Improvements in the network exclusions part would be helpful, as well as enhancements in API functionality and wider tool support for integration with PSA or RMM tools.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

The stability of Auvik Network Management is rated as seven out of ten. There were a few instances of downtime in the year, which took some time to resolve.

I rate the scalability of Auvik Network Management as eight out of ten. The platform scales well and supports our organizational needs.

The customer service and support are rated as six out of ten. Although the support is good, resolving time takes longer than expected, especially for major issues that require escalation.

Neutral

We use Meraki as well for network management.

The initial setup of Auvik Network Management is straightforward and not complex. Setting up new users takes about 20 minutes, and the whole setup process can take around two hours.

I set up Auvik Network Management for new users in the organization.

The return on investment from using Auvik Network Management is estimated at three to four percent due to the time saved in managing network issues efficiently.

I highly recommend Auvik Network Management because it is used by many firms and is a reliable application. 

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I used to work with an organization supporting multiple clients. We implemented Auvik Network Management for some of them, not all of them. 

It was interesting how fast Auvik Network Management could discover the network, how it kept monitoring it and updating us with alerts of any spikes in the traffic, and everything else. It was amazing.

Auvik Network Management reduced the downtime and sped up the recovery.

Auvik Network Management helped our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own because it simplifies the process. It lets you find where the problems are faster. It gives you a clearer view of the situation, where you can see the complete network in front of you graphically. You can see all the devices and where the problem is. When you highlight one of them, you can see all the details.

Auvik Network Management decreased issues because it allowed us to monitor the entire network, all the devices, and check the alerts in a timely manner. We could deal with issues quickly.

The best feature of Auvik Network Management is simplicity. It is friendly to use. 

The dashboard is good. It gives a clear vision for all the aspects of the services that Auvik Network Management provides. We can go to different places and monitor, check, configure, and analyze traffic.

I did not have the chance to go through all the aspects or services that Auvik Network Management provides, but what I dealt with was good, and there was not much to complain about. However, its pricing was a little bit higher. 

I used Auvik Network Management for a couple of months. It was implemented in 2024.

It was stable.

We dealt with different clients, from small to large ones. We used Auvik Network Management on all of them. It was capable of handling all those clients perfectly.

We used their customer service directly. We did not rely much on the documentation. Whenever we had any issues, we used to call their support centers and book a meeting with them.

We had a couple of meetings with them. They introduced the product to us and explained how to deal with it. They had their own support, and we relied on them.

Positive

We used N-able previously. Auvik Network Management was implemented to replace N-able in a certain phase. N-able is similar to Auvik Network Management without the graphics, but it has alerting, monitoring, controlling, updating, and patching capabilities.

N-able is an old product. It is not as modern as Auvik Network Management. Auvik Network Management is easier to deal with and faster to get results from.

It was easy. Auvik Network Management was very easy to set up. It does everything by itself.

It was a matter of minutes to set it up. It did not take a long time to start gathering information. After we installed it on one of our machines, it started gathering information and drawing the network. It is very reliable.

The pricing was a little bit higher. They can work on that as everybody wants to save money.

I would rate Auvik Network Management a nine out of ten.

The use case of my experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM) was an upgrade for my network monitoring tool and the management of the network. It served as an upgrade for my company network and monitoring.

I appreciate the automatization of the dashboard monitoring, the automatic mapping of the network, and the easy deployment of the service. The interactive dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) makes the work more productive and functions automatically. It is easier to work with the dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM). It is a significant advantage of Auvik Network Management (ANM) monitoring. I appreciate the personalization of alerts for the network, such as discovering traffic and the software for traffic analyzation. Auvik makes it easier to work with the network and makes my team more productive.

It would be beneficial if Auvik Network Management (ANM) made it possible to change or manipulate the interface, specifically the network interface of desktop devices.

I have less than a year of experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM), just a few weeks.

They have very good support for any trouble that I could have.

Positive

SolarWinds is provided to us from another provider's network service, a third party. The third party did not give us good SolarWinds service monitoring. We searched for a similar service and found Auvik Network Management (ANM), and after reviewing all their software and systems, we considered Auvik Network Management (ANM) to be much better than SolarWinds. However, the problem might be from the third party and not from SolarWinds. We are using SolarWinds for the moment but are considering Auvik Network Management (ANM) for a change. Because a third party gave us the SolarWinds monitoring, we cannot configure or maintain the service. We can only see the dashboard without any other options. I have used SolarWinds for five or six years.

The service is a bit expensive, but they can negotiate with us to make a better price for us.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) is not implemented in my company for now, but we had a demo. We do not have much experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM), but our first impression was very good. It is pretty easy to use the mapping tools. Everything is automatic, which is very comfortable for the work experience. I rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) eight out of ten.

We use the solution pretty much for what it was designed for. We use it for network monitoring and its dashboards. 

We were trying to solve for visibility more than anything else. The monitoring we do is more preventative than remedial. In the time we've used it, we've migrated a lot. It's helping us more on the understanding and project management side rather than monitoring. 

The ease of setup is one of its most valuable aspects. 

The visibility and topology diagrams are great. The dashboarding is quite useful.

Its integration with ConnectWise has been the most beneficial for managing our network performance. 

Auvik is a bit of a capturing tool. For us, we can highlight the high-level elements and problems. Our network is relatively secure, so we haven't actually used it for alerting. However, it is there as a preventative and monitoring measure more than anything else. 

The interface is great once the configuration is done. 

We do get a real-time picture of our network. The visibility we get is around 95%, with the remaining 5% our fault, based on the way we're set up.

The solution has helped decrease our mean time to resolution. However, it varies, depending upon the severity, for example. It's reducing any networking tickets time to resolution somewhat. For example, we are moving some clients from one subnet to another, and in those circumstances, it's taking half the time for us to do that in a process way. 

If it's purely network monitoring, it's absolutely brilliant. It shows ups and downs, and provides a lot more information than you generally need. However, since we know it provides a lot more information, we use it for lots of different things.

It reduced our mean time to resolution by 20% to 30% across the board. 

For our second line, third line, our network teams, it has increased productivity and reduced time source solutions by about 10% to 15%. 

As with all SMP's monitoring tools, it's a little difficult to get exactly where it needs to be until you've completed your desktop.

We're a bit complicated as a use case as we've got data centers and clients. We're mixed management with multiple subnets. If the network was simpler, it would work perfectly. There are a couple of overlaps. Things could be clearer.

Things are easily confused if there are multiple data feeds. So, if we have a server with three of our network clouds, it won't necessarily get the hierarchy accurate. Being able to drag and influence them in the network map would make a lot more sense. Therefore, being able to influence the map manually and overwrite it or customize it would make a lot of sense.

I've been using the solution for about a year and a half. 

We have the solution in multiple locations, for example, in data centers, client sites, and offices. We don't have a huge amount of endpoints. We do have a cloud platform and use it to monitor that. Our clients are largely SMBs.

We've had no requirement to be in touch with support just yet. 

The only instance of reaching out was when we raised a query during the first time installation. It was a deployment query, and it resolved almost instantly. If we understood the solution a bit more, we could have solved the issue ourselves. 

There is good technical support documentation. There are elements that need to be kept up-to-date, however. They could refresh it a bit more. That said, it's not really a problem or enough to complain about. There are too many changes happening in the industry for any documentation to be perfect. 

Positive

We've used all kinds of solutions. We do have SolarWinds instances, for example, however, we don't tend to use them much. We've also used PRTG. Auvik is faster to set up.

The deployment was simple. We implemented it in half an hour. 

We did have a vendor assist us with the deployment process. 

While I couldn't quantify it at this time, we have definitely seen an ROI. 

It certainly helped out with one of the projects that we're involved with. Whilst we've had it for 18 months, we've really only embraced it over the last six and we won't really see figures from it until the end of next quarter.

We've likely saved five to six hours a week so far.

The solution is a little on the expensive side. That may be skewed for us since we use it more as a monitoring and preventative tool, and largely it's meant to be a remediation tool. While it is expensive, it's not so much so that it makes me want to switch.

We're an Auvik customer and partner. 

While the solution has not yet empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own, they will be able to soon. We're just moving across to utilizing more alerting and bespoke alerting. We're telling Auvik some of the things that we want to know and don't want to know. That is now starting to power the help desk. That change has been happening over the last week. So, by the end of this week, it will be.

I'd recommend the solution to others. Its ease of deployment and ability to provide basic information about a network, and monitoring basic information about a network, is actually very good. It puts things on the screen almost immediately. When alerts fire, it points to those alerts, and you can literally click through and find the problem almost instantly. The only negatives are around some things that you would expect. That said, overall, absolutely, I would recommend it. The peace of deployment and ease of information are worth it. It's very, very easy to understand. It's very, very easy to see where your problems are, and it's very, very easy to use that information to remediate the problems. However, for my advanced monitoring, it's a little more difficult to understand exactly where the information is coming from and how it's utilizing the information. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.