Statseeker Reviews

Our primary use for this solution is to watch and record ports for the entire network.

We are now able to easily track where problems are with bandwidth and port errors, rather than having to do a lot of diagnostics.

The most valuable feature is its ease of use.

I would like to see fully automatic updates so that our version is always current.

The stability of this solution is excellent.

The scalability seems to be pretty good.

Technical support for this solution is good. Sometimes the response times need to be quicker, but their technical knowledge is very good.

Prior to using this solution, we were doing scripting to record bandwidth numbers, and this made things a whole lot simpler.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

We performed the implementation in-house.

We do not have the current version of this solution, but I would love for us to get it.

If you want something that is easy to use and catches the basics, especially for your first line people, then this is the product to go with.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I was primarily using this solution for network traffic analysis. We are switching to another product.

If somebody is complaining about slow networking then this solution allows us to see various ports to find out whether they are being overloaded.

The most valuable feature is the ability to look at historical traffic.

A more user-friendly interface would help because it is sometimes difficult to find specific data that you are looking for. It would be nice if I could easily select individual interfaces.

It would be helpful to be able to view specific ports, more easily.

From what we have discovered, it is not really a single pane of glass.

Stability-wise, this is a good solution.

I do not feel that this solution is very scalable. It is sometimes hard to drill down and find specific interfaces that you need to track.

I have not dealt with their technical support.

We did not use another solution prior to this one. However, we are switching from Statseeker to Observium. The reason for the switch is that in Observium, the interface is really well-refined. You can select individual interfaces and you can pull up graphs really easily.

I was not part of the initial setup.

One of our in-house staff performed the setup.

I have not tracked the ROI.

This is a solution that is useful when you can find the information. It would benefit from being able to view specific ports more easily.

For my recommendation, I would suggest Observium over this solution.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

The fact that it doesn't aggregate the information up, it's very good at troubleshooting. The fact that you have all the information there, it's very easy if you require the information to go back and get it. It's very quick when you're doing a report or when you're looking at something, it's very quick to give you the information. How it improves how we function: its ease of use and its responsiveness.

The most important feature is just the fact that it doesn't aggregate the information up, and I can look at detailed information going back quite a long time. I find that useful in my role.

Overall it is quite stable when. The main issue I've seen, in the last six months to a year, is when I upgrade I seem to be hitting bugs. The upgrade won't go smoothly and I have to engage support. These things happen when you upgrade, it's not the end of the world, but from a stability point of view, the only time I've so far, is during upgrades. And there have been one or two bugs that I've seen across the years, but overall it's quite a stable product.

At least in our deployment, I wouldn't say we've had any scalability issues as of yet. For our environment it seems to be okay.

I have to say they're quite very good. I've never had any issues getting in contact with them. They're quite responsive, so I can't really complain about that.

I've been using the same product in my environment for all the time I've been here.

As Statseeker has released extra features into the product, we have migrated sections of other tools. We have stopped using other tools for various things that we migrated into Statseeker. Why did we switch? It came back to either quickness of reporting, or the fact that other tools did aggregate the information up over a timeframe; with Statseeker we can go back over a time and actually have a look at stuff. The previous product we were using, it would age out the information or aggregate the information up. So, we weren't able to look back in an extended timeframe.

I haven't had to set up the product myself. I've had to build a new server and migrate from the old server to the new server. If I was to treat that as an installation, it was relatively okay, apart from running into one or two technical issues which I had to troubleshoot and to fix. Once I got passed that technical issue, to actually install the product was relatively simple, and to get it up and running was relatively simple.

One thing that needs improvement is how it's licensed. I understand historically the company licensed it off a same charge for everyone. I understand the company needs to make money, but how they introduced the tiered licensing model, and then multiple layers of licensing was a bit of an issue. So, on the whole, coming up with a licensing model that isn't confusing and complicated and is easy to understand would be one way to improve the product.

In terms of licensing, I would say, talk to Statseeker and find out because historically there was multiple layers of licensing. It's confusing. Read through it, try and understand it, ask lots of questions, and make up your mind what you want to do. 

They have told me lately that they're changing how they license stuff, but they haven't made that - as I understand it - in their marketing material public knowledge as of yet.

But I would basically say, if somebody was asking me what do I think of the licensing, I would say that at the moment it's a bit convoluted. It's confusing. Some of their basic licensing model is a bit of a ripoff. If you go over five or ten support calls in the basic licensing model they start charging you for support calls. I think that's a bit rich.

They need to make sure they don't price themselves out of market. They've been quite flexible in the last six months, and they've been good in negotiating the costs, but those are my two main things: making the licensing model easier to understand, and keeping their cost competitive compared to the rest of the market.

Up until we actually talked to Statseeker, and Statseeker came and gave us an enterprise licensing model for multiple accounts, I would have said the pricing was not good value. The fact they've come to the party now and given us a very good discount, I would say it's probably about right, the pricing they're giving us now. But the retail pricing, if I went out and, as a separate company, and asked for pricing for one account, I probably would say their retail pricing is not competitive. The fact that they've given us a discount now because we have multiple servers across multiple accounts, I would say that pricing is about right, but not their retail pricing. It's too expensive.

I would say you would need to understand the licensing model and figure out which one you want to buy and for what reasons. It's not a simple, "Just sign up."

I came into the environment after it was already built. We did compare it against another product to see if the other product could take over from Statseeker, and we determined that that was not possible. We have that other product in our environment and it does other tasks that Statseeker can't do. So, when we evaluated another product against it, we found it wasn't up to what Statseeker could do.

I do know of one or two products out in the market that are targeting themselves at the same niche that Statseeker has. That being said, I have not really played around with Statseeker's competitors and played them off each other as of yet.

From an end-user point of view, I would say it's fairly intuitive once you've got it up and running, once you've spent some time on it. It's a fairly intuitive product as to how to generate reports. It just takes time to work your way through it. Maybe you could get a trainer or a subject matter expert to show people how to do stuff, but the more time you spend on the product, the more you get to understand it, and the easier it is to use. It's not super-complicated to use. There's a reasonable number of instruction videos from Statseeker. It's not a complicated product to use from an end-user perspective and to get people up to scratch.

If you need a product that's able to monitor all the ports in your environment or all the ports that you want, this is a great product to use. Statseeker is quite flexible in tailoring the product, spending time tailoring the product with you. It's fairly low maintenance. It's quite quick.

It's a good tool at what it does, but it's not a tool that you would install in a network operation center to deliver alerts to your tier-1 operators. It's not a Zenoss or an HPE OVO, it's more of a tool that's an eyes-on-glass type of thing. It works in its own niche.

My advice would be, you have to figure out what you actually want the tool to do, and whether or not what you want is what Statseeker is going to give you. We have multiple tools in our environment, which address separate areas, and Statseeker can't do everything. So before you buy it, figure out if the capability the product has is actually what you're trying to address.

I'd give it an eight out of 10, and the reason is it's a very all round good product, but for quite a long time the impression that we got was they weren't developing the product. There weren't any new features coming out. Now that being said, over the last year or two, it seems like they've had new personnel come on board, and they've started to put in new features, and started to be more customer focused; they've started to develop the product. But if they want to stay in the market, in my opinion, they need to keep on developing the product and adding features, because there are other players out in the market that they seem to be constantly adding new features and tweaking the product on quite a regular basis.

That being said, I haven't tried the competitors' products, but it seems to me, the other players in the market are developing product at a rapid pace. So they need to keep up.

It's servicing our requirements at the moment and Statseeker is very flexible. When we ask them, "Can you put this feature in?" they'll work with us and help us out, but we're just one account. What I'm trying to say is, I could see how, if I was a person comparing products at the moment, if there was a fresh environment, I would probably play Statseeker off against the other main competitor, which I believe is AKIPS, and I would tick which one I like the most and serves my need the best, and to be honest it might not be Statseeker.

Statseeker is a great product. It's doing what we need. But if we wanted to switch over to another product it would require a lot of work, because there is all sorts of stuff we do with Statseeker which we would have to rewrite. We're a happy enough customer at the moment, but that might not be the case if I went somewhere else and somebody said to me, "You need to buy a product." Would I necessarily buy Statseeker? Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. That's why I'm giving it an eight, because I'm not automatically saying I'm going to implement this wherever I go. If I need to address an issue that Statseeker can help me out with, and if a company was coming to me saying, "This is your budget," then I would compare it with other products beforehand.

My favorite feature is Traffic Analyzer (NetFlow). I use this part of the tool nearly every day to validate what traffic (source and destination) is communicating, how much bandwidth they are consuming and what protocols they are using. It assists in troubleshooting immensely. We use the alerting features to notify of performance issues, device outages, and firewall failover situations. We have used the historical data tool many times to review historical performance. Since it keeps all historical data, we can get pretty much everything we need.

When we have bandwidth spikes or outages, we use this tool to analyze what device or devices are causing the issue. Then, we evaluate the data and the case, and decide how to proceed with configuration changes to prevent the issue from recurring.

We would like to see improvements in reporting and multiple-user integration. Reporting has everything you can think of, but it can be cumbersome to set up and tweak the reports to get the exact data you want. When setting up multiple users with AD authentication, it is a bit tricky and problematic. I wish this had an easier integration.

I have used Statseeker for 14 months.

We have not had any issues with stability. This product has worked right out of the box. Once set up, we have upgraded a few times and never experienced any real issues with the tool.

We have not had any scalability issues. It has been able to successfully handle all the devices and information we have thrown at it.

The technical support guys are great to work with and know what they are doing. There are times when they are slow to respond, but I have always gotten my issue resolved.

We have used multiple solutions. We wanted something that would track everything on our network. The integration with the Traffic Analyzer (NetFlow) data we get from Statseeker really helped and it is awesome that they included this in the price. All other solutions seemed to want to charge extra for that feature. Ease of installation and setup was a bonus.

You install, add SNMP credentials, add devices and BAM. Done. Setting it up was easy, and, once you add a device, the data is there. No silly maps to play with and a simple dashboard were great. It also helped that they offer a full demo of the product. That allowed me to install the product and show management the capabilities. The week after I installed it, we used the tool to help identify an issue that we had been experiencing and it assisted greatly in resolving the issue.

Pricing is competitive. It’s not the cheapest solution, but it includes everything and does everything they claim. Be sure to be conservative on your port count, you will run over your licensing if you don’t. Estimate high so you can track all your ports.

We compared SolarWinds, Icinga, Snort, and MRTG.

Get their full trial, try it out and use it to solve your issues, you will not be disappointed.

Our primary use for this solution is historical traffic wrapping.

This solution only handles a very small slice of what we actually need to monitor, so it is just another product in a set of products we use.

This solution helps in terms of troubleshooting, and you can do capacity planning with it.

The single pane of glass simplifies management because I don’t have to spend time supporting eight different products. I only have to support one.

The most valuable features are the tracking of trends and the presenting of graphs.

The granularity is not the best and it's not the worst. It’s fine

The user interface needs a great deal of improvement.

The stability of this solution is fine.

Scalability is horrible. The more stuff we add to Statseeker the more we have to sift through with a horrible interface. It doesn't scale well.

I am not the person that deals with technical support.

Switching had to do with the cost of supporting multiple products. If there is just one product that does it all then it's cheaper, in the long run, to maintain and manage.

I was not the one who deployed this solution, so I do not know.

We evaluated StableNet from Infosim, and we went with them because they had the most functionality of all of the different products that we use.

The interface for this solution is terrible and can be improved in literally any way.

I would rate this solution a three out of ten.

Our primary use case for Statseeker is for network monitoring.

It is quicker and faster responding to troubleshooting.

The solution reduces the complexity of our network monitoring because it can make my engineers do their jobs faster. The solution also reduces troubleshooting time for network administrators to pinpoint issues quicker.

In terms of network availability, we have a faster response to outages and thus, faster remediations in uptime.

It's fast and easy.

The solution's network visibility is very in-depth and granular. I can look at one-minute data points and it does not roll data up over time.

There is a little bit of room to improve in the alerting section to give some more options there. It's all I can think of right now off the top of my head.

The solution also has very good stability.

The solution has very good scalability.

Their technical support is very good. They solved every issue we've had.

We didn't really have a previous solution. It was kind of a home-grown solution, so Statseeker was easy. It was inexpensive. It fit the need and was very fast to get implemented.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We may not have a solidified ROI, but my engineers' time to troubleshoot was reduced so they can focus on other, more important issues.

The licensing cost is yearly and it's $5,000 to $8,000, I think.

We didn't really have a short list. It was just one or two. I think the other company doesn't exist anymore. We chose Statseeker because of the ease use, fast deployments, and simple interface.

It's a great product and if you're looking for network monitoring, I would highly recommend it.

The biggest lesson I learned is that having one-minute granularity that doesn't roll up over time is incredibly important if we want to do any historical troubleshooting.

I would rate Statseeker as nine out of ten, not a ten only because it wasn't free.

It is a good monitoring tool. It does the job.

It helps us track the status of over 1200 devices in multiple geographical locations.

Integration including ability to do network diagrams.

We have been using this solution for three years.

We had a stability issue. It seems to occasionally hiccup with duplicate IPs.

There weren't really any issues with scalability.

Technical support, at least for me, has been good. No complaints on technical support.

I was using SolarWinds NPM/NCM. This department was already using Statseeker and didn’t want to change.

It’s getting better, but it still requires some low-level Unix command line tweaking occasionally. I’ve seen two Statseeker techs work several hours to fix it.

Interface counting/reporting with Juniper switches adds TWO interfaces for every single interface. That is killing our licensing. I’ve had to tweak removing some interfaces that I don’t want to track.

I worked with SolarWinds for ten years.

Know Unix. It’s a must.

Our primary use for this solution is troubleshooting. We use it for logging and monitoring the routers and switches in the environment. It assists us with capacity planning.

This is a very cheap solution in order for us to accomplish what we needed to do in terms of providing visibility into the network. The visibility is such that it allows us to be a little proactive when it comes down to issues in the environment. It provides us with graphs and stats that we can use to make sure that there is not an issue with the network.

This solution complements our network monitoring. We have other products that provide a more comprehensive type of monitoring, and this one supplements that, especially for the retail environment.

It allows us to have some visibility into our service provider's equipment. It provides us the last-mile circuits down to the stores that we have.

It has helped our network admin team because it gives them visibility into the environment when there are issues. Workload-wise, I think it probably saves them time.

It just allows us to be more proactive. It gives a way to diagnose issues when they arise.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of adding new devices into it.

I would like to see more comprehensive reporting and alerting. We do have other, more expensive solutions that handle that aspect of it. However, it would be nice to be able to specify baseline thresholds. If we're approaching those then we would be alerted, and it would probably help us with our job of troubleshooting.

This is a very stable solution. It hasn't gone down.

Scalability-wise, it's a monitoring platform so it's pulling these devices via SNMP. I would say if I needed an additional service to take on the workload then I would just provide additional storage. It's very simple to install.

This component is so easy that we rarely needed to call support. When we did contact them then they were very effective. No issues.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

We deployed this solution with our in-house team.

We have seen ROI through the ability to troubleshoot more effectively. That is where the benefits came in.

When it came to selecting this solution, it came down to cost. Our licensing fees are on an annual basis.

We looked at several options including Voyance, Computer Associates eHealth, and SolarWinds. The Statseeker solution stood out because it was simple to use and easy to deploy.

This is a good solution in terms of ease of use and ease of deployment. It is a cost-effective solution that provides basic functionality. However, the bells and whistles that other vendors have will need to be provided or enhanced in Statseeker in order for it to compete. 

The biggest lesson that I learned is how easy it is deployed.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.