ControlUp Reviews

Our primary use case was for our 17,000 Citrix 1912 LTSR and VMWare ESXi stateful VDIs. We're leveraging ControlUp to monitor, report, and carry out basic automated remediations at every level of the stack - from the edge through the Citrix Gateways down to OS level. 

Ultimately, we needed a tool that had insights into the data and could present it in a way that was easy to digest and allowed us to make it available to all levels of support within our organization. We have since extended this to all 40,000+ Windows devices we operate. 

The Solve interface has provided us the ability to view our entire estate including physical devices in a single pane of glass. This has transformed the way we approach the troubleshooting and reporting of our estate.

The ControlUP console allows us to delegated tasks "to the left" - i.e. democratize the data to members of the support organisation that wouldn't normally have access to all of the data required to correlate all of the information.

We have enabled the triggers linked to script-based actions to resolve a handful of our repeat tasks, specifically our start-of-week checks making sure all the VDIs are registered and ready to be used.

Solve is quickly becoming one of the most-used features. Its interface allows us to connect to all 54,000 monitored endpoints in real-time. 

The script-based actions have allowed us to extend the core reporting capabilities. Combined with the triggers, we have been growing their usage to fix things before they become an issue.

Lastly, the controller view allows us to compare the configurations of settings side-by-side which is extremely helpful when tracking down the RCA of an issue.

Solve is a quick and intuitive tool for quickly mapping data together, however, once you have the view of the data that you like, it is difficult to share this with colleagues. Being able to send a deep link of the view that you have created or, even better, being able to export the results to a .CSV to be shared offline would be a fantastic addition to the tool.

A concept like metadata that can be appended to objects in the ControlUP database would allow for more flexibility in grouping that data together

I've used the solution for two and a half years.

We have had a good level of service in regard to stability. Like all tools in this space, they do have issues with the volumes of data at times. However, with proactive monitoring, we are made aware of issues in a timely manner.

With Solve, the product is easily able to scale to our 40,000+ endpoints. However, the original console is limited to around 3,000 devices being monitored at a time. As they migrate more functionality into the web console (Solve) most of my concerns with scalability will fall away.

Customer service and support have been responsive and are a real asset to the experience. It has improved during our usage of the product.

Positive

We did use a different product. The previous solution wasn't intuitive, and, as a result, adoption by the support teams was stunted. 

From the end of the PoC to fully deployed in production we took just six months. For decent adoption, it required a further six months.

The product is very straightforward especially if you have a clear idea how you want to structure the machines you will be monitoring and who will be given access.

We handled the solution's setup in-house

I have found ControlUP to be more than competitive in terms of value.

We also evaluated Nexthink, Goliath, EG Innovations, OpenSource, VMware, and Citrix Insights.

The company has been responsive to our requests for features and seems to be very agile in developing new features and content. They have been very transparent with their development processes.

The use cases are technically things that can be easily virtualized and offered as a service on a public cloud. For example, we can use some services like software as a service on the public cloud. However, we can't do this with other services, like the legacy system of an IBM mainframe, some old databases, or some applications that we cannot transfer. So the capabilities of the legacy system determine what we can do. 

We have developed our own KPIs and based on those, we can see the productivity of MTTR measured in the time between failures, recovery time, and flexibility. We can see productivity in terms of manual work that has been automated. So ControlUp makes us leaner through automation and optimization of the processes. 

In terms of the public cloud, ControlUp's features make us feel very secure. Security, uptime, and reduced capital expenditures are the main reasons we use ControlUp. So basically, the money that we consume is based on the amount of time we are using a service. ControlUp offers a return-on-investment type of approach that helps us.

Integration is always a problem, and we feel that we are doing our best and the service provider thinks they are doing their best. I guess if ControlUp's system could be more capable or if people could understand the integration part, that would be better. The service providers feel that this might be some inherent deficiency on our end, and I think this is their problem. So I believe integration is one issue. Everybody is looking for a seamless transition, so integration needs to be very seamless. Also, everything should be more automated and visible, so we have a key performance indicator or something that we can quickly evaluate. If those types of things are available in the solution, it'll be easier for us to make decisions. And it'll be better for the service providers to market their products because they can say that these are the most significant features or these are the essential aspects. 

I've been working in security for the last 20 years.

We do have a quality assurance department and a performance department that reviews all those types of things. They have a set of criteria for the system, including errors, false positives, false negatives, and system downtime. They also have the criteria for change management, including patches and updates. So there are multiple key performance indicators, and based on that, they come up with a report that shows this is very stable or unstable or needs to replace a wrong or right decision.

But stability is a relative term. We want everything to be error-free and crystal clear, but there is always a gray area. And the gray area is that the service provider comes up with software updates, new features, or feedback from other customers, and they implement it in our system too. So it's a moving target even if it's a turnkey project. And I believe it's turnkey, but the product is not mature, whoever the vendor is. So, for example, let's say you are the vendor, and I believe you guys are not fully functional. I know that the solution is 90 percent functional, and 10 percent can be modified, but it looks like they are just trying to learn like us. I may be a little bit paranoid or a perfectionist, or maybe I'm on the extreme side of Six Sigma, where I want 99.99999 percent, or I don't want to pay. So stability is a crucial factor, but we compromise based on our budget constraints. At the end of the day, you get what you paid for.

Scalability is also another trap. Say, for example, we initially established a master service agreement that says we need to do this much work, and it covers three years. And over three years, we are locked in because the new features and services mean the rate will be higher. So we could end up at a point where we have to ditch ControlUp for another company that can give us a better bargain. So there needs to be some long-term planning regarding scalability. You need to have 5 to 10 years of visibility to know on the first day what your partnership will be with the client in the long term. You need to predict constraints, features, or costs two years from now. Take Oracle, for example. If you have the Oracle system database for expansion, you need to pay any licensing fees. So what may happen, that company may use Oracle for some things and IBM for others.

Scalability is a tricky thing. It's up to ClontrolUp to figure out how to handle it. The solution should be scalable to retain a client in the long run rather than a short-term benefit. If you get a short-term benefit, maybe you can make money on the client's first 100 clients. However, you may not make money from the next 100 clients because your price is so high that the client switches.

I think this is related to our strategy. At this point, things are changing because of COVID. There are so many projects on hold, but we randomly get new projects because of remote work and those types of constraints. We reevaluate our scale regularly. I can't say it's every quarter, but the senior management must reassess what they should do and prioritize based on need. We had an ideal vision and a definitive strategy two years back, but now this strategic plan is tied to the short-term tactical plan. We're thinking about what is essential to do right now, rather than the plan we set several years back.

After-sales support based on the warranty or SLA that we agreed on is another thing they can improve. I would prefer a service provider who gives me peace of mind although it'll cost me, and we have a limited budget, and you might say, "We cannot do this thing." ControlUp will do more business and get more customers if it can raise its integration expertise and become more very flexible.

In terms of support, there are two constants in the field. One is technical know-how. There are older technicians who have been on the job for 20 or 30 years. Often they are reluctant to change themselves or it's hard for them to adopt virtualization or different kinds of new technologies. So it is an inherent deficiency from the customer side. 

The reason we switched to ControlUp boils down to flexibility and cost. Miscommunication is another factor. By that, I mean there are disagreements because we assume something and the other party assumes something else. So I think it's a fight-or-flight type of situation right now. Maybe you can get a contract today for two years, and after two years, perhaps our expectation is too high or maybe your expectation is so high, and the market is very fluid right now. There are so many complete solutions coming up with different offerings, so a client switches.

The initial setup is complex because they have the template. For example, say you are the service provider with a template or some use cases for another retail store or another customer. Your engineer, architect, or solution manager thinks that people like this, but one size doesn't fit all. So you are customer support or pre-sale support, and you're helping a retail customer like Coles, JCPenney, or Starbucks. It's possible that the Starbucks template might be helpful for Dunkin' Donuts, but Dunkin' Donuts might have a distinct set of constraints. 

First, we did the pilot program in one geographical area because we operate all over the United States. So our strategy was first to do the pilot then deploy on a regional basis in the Northeast region, like New York, New Jersey, or Connecticut, or in Northwest California and Nevada over the next three years. It will be in phases, but there will be a pilot first. However, sometimes a vendor will go above and beyond during the pilot just to get the contract. But when it comes time for the real thing, they say, "It was something different we were not expecting." We believe that in a pilot, you need to deal with all kinds of scenarios. So maybe it's our fault that in the pilot, the salesperson came to us and we gave them our answer, and he made the pilot. But I think the project's integration should be seamless from end to end, whether you blame me or you blame yourself. The critical thing is that if you blame the customer, the customer is not happy in the end. Customers are not willing to work. They are not very proactive or agile. Customers are not like salespeople, who are providing the product. You are selling your product, so your mindset is different from the customer mindset. 

For deployment, we usually do a partnership with the vendors. So they handle about 75 to 80 percent of the deployment, and after deployment, we are responsible for 100 percent. But this depends on the footprint. It depends on the whole scope in that region, area, or department — in that enterprise section of a business unit. But we always have issues with the operation. That's why we try to automate more. Operationally, staffing is a constraint for us, so we want less and less manual intervention.

There are several scenarios for deployment. In one scenario, we prefer some managed service provider or integrator from our pre-qualified list. For example, there is a procurement department, and they have a preferred vendor or something like that. So they approach them and do some pre-implementation, or sometimes we go out of the box, or we go for some other new venture with a new vendor. In another scenario, we may hire a consulting company to assess where we are and what we need to do. For example, there are some regulations that we have to comply with under the California Consumer Privacy Act. We can hire a company who can help us with compliance. We know what we have to do, but we employ a consulting company to help us and even interview us to make sure that we don't make mistakes. Even we interview ourselves and assess ourselves, but having an extra set of eyes is safer. 

ROI is relative. I cannot disclose any specific figures, but I can detail our approach to ROI. When we made our contractual agreement, we set some baseline expectations. And if those are met, we are okay. But if we deviate from those benchmarks, then it is a problem. If that's the case, it's better to switch to a different vendor because this vendor is not delivering as promised. So for us, we expect everything that is in our scope, and if the vendor twists it around and says, "No, this is not the case," then this is a gray area. And I think it should be black and white. Although from the customer side, it's better for me to make things gray to get as much service from the vendor. 

I think our license is yearly, and there's a limitation on the number of licenses that we agree to. It's somehow related to the number of licenses, but I think everything is consolidated in the annual agreement. They always come up with a new story or something that isn't covered or that these facilities we are asking for are not part of the initial agreement. So there are some hidden charges and some service charges that we were not aware of at the time of the agreement. It's not a one-time deal that was settled when we signed the contract. It is a two-year contract for a certain amount then there are hidden service and maintenance charges along with some extraordinary root cause analysis issues. For example, when we have some problems, we go to the vendor, and they say, "We can do up to this much, but if you want further, it'll cost person-hours, then you need to pay."

There was a whole process. First, there's a request for proposals and a proof of concept. They evaluated different vendors according to some baseline criteria for the system and features we must have. And based on those essential criteria, the procurement department assessed and considered a shortlist of providers according to features, return on investment, service-level agreement, and the expansion plan. 

I would rate ControlUp Real-Time eight out of 10. I think from the customer side, you need to know what you want and have a clear idea of the scope so that there isn't scope creep. From the standpoint of a service provider, you should articulate your questions or your questionnaires or talk with a customer. It should be enough that the customer doesn't say after three months they weren't asked. Your questions should be very agile and open-ended so you will know inside out when you assess any proposal. But at that time, what happened? The salesperson went, "We just need to get the purchase order." It's okay that you got a purchase order, but if I work for a company, I will always be on the other side of the fence. I will never represent any manufacturer or something, but I believe that their mindset is focused on the account. Their mindset is centered on the purchase order, and I think it's good that you have a purchase order or that you won the account, but the important thing is that scope should be well defined from your perspective when you have the scope.

A customer may not tell you everything, and then you've dug yourself into a deep hole where you won't foresee an integration issue happening. And you have no clue, and you are saying, "We will see." And the customer said, "We need to complete this task by this date." So everyone needs a well-defined scope written down at the outset. It will save you from haggling later on because something needs to be descoped. Customers will not say that "You need to do this thing. You already show that this was another part of the scoping."

First, I need to explain our environment and its composition. We mainly use virtualization platforms, such as Hyper-V hypervisor and VMware vSphere, and recently we purchased the Nutanix platform. We are still in the deployment phase, so we have not yet integrated ControlUp with our Nutanix platform, but we have already configured it to monitor the other visualization platforms, Hyper-V and VMware vSphere. We don't have VDI environments, so we don't use this part of ControlUp. Instead, we are monitoring the hypervisors, the virtual machines and the critical ones. Because the licensing used by ControlUp is per IP address, we have a limited number of IP addresses to monitor.

We monitor critical platforms such as Microsoft Exchange and SharePoint alongside storage. Unfortunately, ControlUp cannot monitor the networking infrastructure. Other solutions, such as SolarWinds NPM, give you many modules where you can purchase their license and add more features. ControlUp is a very good solution, but when we monitor an environment, it is very difficult. It's not appropriate to have multiple monitoring solutions, and the administrator needs only one console to see the global network and infrastructure being supervised. That's the only thing ControlUp lacks to become the best solution ever.

A valuable feature is the ability to run scripts when an event happens. For example, if the system partition starts to lack space, we have a script that deletes temporary files and other unwanted files. We like this feature the most. It also gives us an insight into the direction of our infrastructure. Another feature we like is the capacity to plan our infrastructure. We can know if our infrastructure can handle more workloads or if we need to add more computing resources.

The only thing we need to be available in ControlUp is the ability to monitor network infrastructure. Currently, I am both the system administrator and in charge of administrating the network. Unfortunately, we don't have a solution for monitoring the network infrastructure. ControlUp doesn't allow us to monitor the network infrastructure, so we are obliged to acquire another solution that allows us to monitor the network. But we are faced with two different and heterogeneous solutions, which is the only downside with ControlUp.

In addition, the graphical user interface needs to be improved from version to version. When a new version is introduced, there must be changes in the user interface. Sometimes it is crowded with a lot of information and graphs, which disturbs and does not allow us to focus on an object.

The solution lacks network monitoring and should be improved in the next version. If it isn't improved and takes too much time to implement, we can't stay without a network monitoring solution, and we will be obliged to acquire another one. We may acquire the SolarWinds NPM module to monitor the network infrastructure. When working with government institutions, we must justify our purchases and can't purchase two solutions simultaneously.

We have been using this solution for 18 months. For some context, I work with a government institution here in Morocco, and we have many contracts with different companies. Sometimes they come to us and present a solution that fits our needs, and then we buy it. So a company approached us and presented ControlUp, and we were very interested in it. One of their engineers came, and we installed it together and had an opportunity to test it. It was good, so we deployed it in a production environment.

Once you install and configure a monitoring solution, it works independently. The majority of work is done during the installation and deployment process. If there is an incident and something is wrong, then we can connect and see what is happening. 

It is deployed on-premises and on four servers, one for the database, one for the insights, one for the application and one for the monitor. We are using version 7.4.

It is a stable solution. It is reliable, and its performance is good.

It is scalable in a way. It has multiple instances of the same component, and we are using four servers for each component. We allocate enough resources, memory, and CPU for each visual machine to allow the solution to work properly. We don't have many virtual machines, and if we count the server nodes with virtual machines and storage volumes, we have less than 200.

Only two people are using this solution. The main roles used are the administrator. However, we have other roles, and the IT department comprises many divisions. For example, we have a development division, system, and network administration. Sometimes we give users access to ControlUp to monitor their servers, but not the administrator role.

Maintenance is done only once, and when a client is a ministry or government institution, we rely on other companies to do the maintenance. Sometimes they come and install updates and check if everything is working fine. They come when there is a ticket problem, or something occurs with the solution. However, we have not had any tickets since we deployed, so it is very reliable.

We have not had any interactions with the support team of Control Up. When we purchase a solution from a company, the company supports everything.

In the past, another division used SolarWinds, and they used it for about eight years. Unfortunately, they didn't use or configure it properly, so we didn't exploit the full capacity and capabilities of SolarWinds. After this, it was cancelled, and we stayed without a monitoring solution for a long time. In addition, the team in charge of using and administering SolarWinds wasn't fully trained to use and configure the solution. As a result, we started to have problems in our environment, servers crashed, there was a power failure, and we weren't notified. We were only notified when users called to say that their email service was not working and some servers were not joinable. We then decided to look for another monitoring solution, and another company presented us with ControlUp.

The initial setup was straightforward and not complex. Deployment was done with the assistance of the company that presented the solution to us. They installed it first, and we were available to assist them regarding prerequisites, active directory accounts and servers. We only required one person, an engineer, to deploy. I worked together with the engineer to deploy the ControlUp environments.

Deployment was very fast, and we completed it on the same day. It took just a day to set up the environments' prerequisites, virtual machines, database and accounts. The installation process and the linking between components of ControlUp, apps, monitor, insight, and license activation were also on the same day. As a result, ControlUp has an easy installation process.

We have seen an ROI. For example, the solution prevents us from falling into bad scenarios. It allows us to have good RPO and RTO values. It prevents us from losing data and having a lot of downtime and prevents crashed servers. We had many electricity and power outages and lost hardware in the past. So when we installed ControlUp, it took measures before any catastrophe happened.

I don't have any information about pricing because it's another area that manages the financial part. One well-known thing is that the reseller always adds a small amount, especially if that reseller is the only one who sells this solution. However, despite this, the price is still good. I rate the pricing an eight out of ten.

We compared ControlUp to other solutions, but some of their benefits were not aligned with ours. For example, a company approached us to present the Cisco HyperFlex hyper-converged infrastructure. We were considering purchasing HyperFlex, but when we started to compare all HTI hyper-converged infrastructure available, we found that Nutanix was one of the best solutions. It is even number one in the Gartner Magic Quadrant. I then advised my manager to go with Nutanix instead of HyperFlex. At the time, only one company in Morocco used HyperFlex, and they cancelled their purchase of the HyperFlex platform and went with Nutanix.

Every time we compared a solution proposed by a company with an available solution on the internet, we found that ControlUp was missing the feature of monitoring network infrastructure, but my manager decided that we could not wait any longer, and the price of ControlUp was reasonable and cheaper than SolarWinds licenses, so we proceeded with ControlUp. When you are using or purchasing SolarWinds licenses, it's composed of a pack of X licenses. I believe it starts with 250 licenses, the next one is 2,000, and the third one is unlimited. It was too much for what we needed, so we went with ControlUp.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten because it is one of the best. Regarding advice, if the need is to monitor the virtual infrastructure and virtual infrastructure composed with VMware, Hyper-V or Nutanix, especially with Nutanix, then ControlUp is a good solution because it offers many features. For example, with automatic action and execution, when events happen, you can schedule actions to be executed on a schedule. It gives you the ability to write your scripts using batch PowerShell. It also allows you to write other batch scripts and Linux bash scripts. It has great insight results and allows you to describe it. Also, it gives you an overview of the capacity of your environment so that you know if you need to add more resources or compute nodes or storage. If you want an all-in-one solution, ControlUp is the best.

This product's most valuable feature is that it allows you to consume many resources from a centralized tool. For example, it has a great career time monitoring tool. There was also a tool that allowed us to view what was occurring in the environment by enabling us to look into every processor running in a machine without even logging into it.

An area of the product that can be improved is creating a script action in the product to power on the machine at a certain time. This runs a particular script at a particular time each week in a specific frequency. This feature was not initially available when I used the product, but I am unaware it is available now.

We previously used this solution for approximately nine months.

The stability of this product depends on the workload. Our company had a large environment, so we faced intermittent issues daily. However, the pros of the product were more significant than the cons. The primary con we had in our environment was how a previous employee deployed it because it led to a challenge adding resources to a text file. Additionally, we had some issues with some active directory connections related to specific parts and license issues. However, the support team was helpful whenever we sent an email to them. They always responded with detailed steps, and if you could resolve the issue, they set up a meeting to assist you.

The on-premises version has limited scalability as challenges occur because the console takes a lot of computer power. However, with the cloud environment, it is a scalable product because you don't have to perform any upgrades as everything is taken care of by ControlUp. I was the only user using this product in my company.

We had a good experience with customer service and support. Our organization was very large and had a premium license, so we got special treatment as loyal customers. In addition, we had a dedicated CRM customer relationship manager assigned to us. I rate customer service and support an eight and a half out of ten because when the support people get changed, it takes time for others to be familiar with the product.

Positive

The initial setup was very easy. The product helps in the process of onboarding and deployment, and the user is only required to complete the minimum requirement assigned by computing details for their infrastructure, the resources they want to introduce, and the server's complete specifications. Additionally, they assist in setting up the configuration section. I rate the initial setup an eight out of ten because a person who doesn't know about the product will face challenges with the setup, but someone who has experience with the tool and its infrastructures can easily set it up.

I was using the best license ControlUp had available. I don't remember the license name, but it was in the premium category and the best license they provided. Unfortunately, I cannot comment on the cost as I do not remember the exact number. The price is higher when compared to other monitoring tools, but it provides you with more features.

I did not use any other monitoring tools apart from ControlUp.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten because I haven't used any other products. The product is very good, but it can be improved by including script-based scheduling and an insight tool that allows historical viewing reports according to your requirements.

We have nearly 10000 Citrix VDIs on our estate and native tooling cannot provide the high and low level monitoring that we require. We wanted a tool that could not only provide a granular view of our infrastructure but also assist with its administration. We looked at other competitors, however, the power, usability and value of ControlUp made it the obvious choice. 

Having a central console with granular security makes administration simple and yet powerful. We are able to delegate control to the teams that need access to specific areas and can also create read-only views for non-admins.

With ControUp, we got the monitoring we needed and more. For one thing, we love the automatic remediation which enables us to free up resources that aren't used. This saves us from having to constantly get involved and make manual changes. 

When VDI hasn't been used for x number of days we can simply shut them down - something that an on-prem deployment would normally require manual intervention for.

We can also see issues often before our users complain. Log-on times, for example, are a great barometer of customer satisfaction. When these go up we know there are issues, and, using ControlUp, we are only ever a couple of clicks away from determining the root cause.

We also like the scores that it gives our estate (which can be tailored) so we can instantly see where we have issues. 

The high-level view of the estate coupled with powerful administration tools has been great. We can see real-time performance and trends and can create triggers for common issues with associated scripts that can automate a lot of the previous manual remediation steps. 

Integration with Netscaler and Scoutbees can provide a proper end-to-end analysis of the user's experience and give us a real ROI.

Historical reporting is also really useful. Being able to go back in time to see exactly what was happening at the time of an outage or even just to analyse which applications are being used or to get capacity suggestions straight from the Insights console it very useful.

The support from ControlUp is also very responsive and professional. 

We'd like to see the mobile app working again so that we can get alerts 24/7. This is especially useful for the person on call.

I particularly like the monthly Advisory Teams meeting that have been arranged recently. They offer valuable insights into the direction of the company and give us users a chance to express our thoughts and provide real direction to the company. 

One area that I do think would be of benefit would be a monthly email from Insights offering a summary of trends and potentially where we can afford to cut back on CPU and RAM.

I've used the solution for four years.

I find it to be very stable. If there are issues with the retention or collection of emails I am often alerted by ControlUp before noticing it myself.

Scaling up is as simple as adding an additional monitor server. 

We have used their support and professional services. Both have been responsive and very knowledgeable. 

Positive

We only had SCOM and Director previously.

The initial setup requires nothing more than a single EXE and a spare workstation with sufficient RAM/CPU for the trial.  

Automation of common tasks has seen a measurable drop in manual actions and has saved enough time to release perhaps 1 FTE. They can now focus on more engineering work.

I'd advise running a trial. This is quick and simple to get running. 

If you opt to buy then it's essential to ensure you include the Automated Actions license - this is where the real power is.

We evaluated Lakeside and Nexthink

As mentioned, opt for the Trial. You'll have 30 days to really see how beneficial ControlUp is.