Zabbix Reviews

We primarily use the solution for monitoring issues and availability.

This product is very easy to deploy. It is easy to deploy as a Docker if you do not want to do a full deployment. 

The initial setup, while not simple, is easier than other products.

It offers native support of VMware ESXi integration.

The solution is stable.

It's free; it's open-source. 

The documentation has been very useful. The community is quite helpful as well. 

The networking monitor is not too easy to work with. It's like switch monitoring. It's okay, yet not perfect. It's something they could improve on. I'm still using SmokePing since the network monitoring isn't so great.

The initial setup isn't exactly easy.

I've been using the solution for one year. 

I've found the product to be quite stable and reliable. There aren't bugs or glitches. I do not have issues with it crashing or freezing. 

I cannot speak to the scalability of the product. My scale is quite small. I've never reached the limit o the server. 

I'm the only one who uses the product right now. I only use it in my personal lab and therefore have no plans to expand usage right now. 

I've never dealt with technical support. I cannot say how helpful or responsive they are. 

A long time ago, I used Zenoss. Zenoss basically focused more on larger enterprises. The community version of Zenoss was less well-maintained. Zabbix has a better community. That was a major reason for switching. 

The implementation process was okay. No monitoring tool is easy, I would say. It's not extremely easy, and yet, it's not extremely complex like some of the other tools. There's a moderate level of complexity during deployment. The entire process takes a couple of hours.

For my level of usage, I only need one person, and that is me, to handle any maintenance tasks. 

I handled the implementation personally. I did not need the help of or use integrators or consultants.

In terms of ROI, it's been providing faster troubleshooting when there are issues. It provides a good dashboard to show global health. 

This is an open-source product, which makes it free to use. 

I'm a customer and end-user. 

We're currently using the latest update of the product. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Zabbix is used for monitoring infrastructure, including networks and servers. It is used for monitoring the performance of each device. It can also be used for application monitoring, but the integration is not easy.

Zabbix is an excellent performance monitoring tool. It's an open-source tool, and it's free to use. You don't need to pay anything, and it uses little resources. You can use Zabbix if you have a small infrastructure and not a critical one.

The integration of the product is not so easy, especially when it comes to the application database. Finding customized agents for each product needs some deep understanding. They also don't have a license for the product, but you can purchase a support contract they provide.

Unlike NETSCOUT, Zabbix lacks the capability to work purely on packets, drill down on root causes and monitor any infrastructure regardless of the vendor.

We have been using Zabbix for one year.

The product is stable, and it is a very good product.

Approximately 10 to 15 people are using the solution in our company.

Zabbix is an open-source tool, and it's free to use.

Zabbix is a really good tool because it is an open-source tool.

In the future, we might consider using products like NETSCOUT, capable of root cause analysis, which works at the pocket level and can give us some insights into our overall infrastructure.

Overall, I rate Zabbix an eight out of ten.

We primarily use it for monitoring, but also for some other things.

In terms of customization and integration, we have more flexibility. We can automate configurations, define deletion rules, and customize based on your needs. The client interface allows for further configuration, making it quite comprehensive.

Architecturally, we can even extend to the cloud using Suncoast servers and proxy servers to communicate with WorkRock or the supervisor. The compatible database list makes configuration straightforward.

User-friendliness is another strong point. We have a customizable dashboard. We can define metrics directly in the web portal, avoiding editing configuration files. This provides several advantages, especially when managing multiple collections.

There are areas of improvement. The database grows really fast. So, when you install Zabbix, you have to deal with some issues, like the database. We become pretty big very fast. 

This leads to optimization challenges, requiring manual deletion of network components like SNMP. We should work with SNMP. It's not as simple as configuring the host incident.

Configuration can also be difficult. The use of a workflow in the configuration of items or triggers makes it difficult to use an item in a mature way. It's hard to set up a dynamic workflow. While workflows exist, setting them up for specific data sources like network items can be a hurdle. You may need to find alternative methods, which isn't ideal.

For some customers, there are some personal customization challenges. But, for me, it's okay.

I have been using this solution for a year. We use version 6.0, which is the next recommended version. We don't do long-term tests, so it is a middle version.

The latest long-term support version we're using is 6.1.0.

I would rate the stability a seven out of ten. 

There are around less than 20 end users in the company. These include admins, managers, and engineers. 

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

I work with the public community like a public forum. So, when I have a request, I use the public community forums. We usually find solutions within a day or two, depending on availability.

Neutral

There are many options available. Today, you can use alternatives that provide better-detailed information. For instance, we have alerts concerning specific issues. I'm using Azure as part of this organizational setup. 

In Zabbix, for metrics, the latest release is better, and we can also find some metrics. Essentially, we don't incur any cost of the same magnitude. In Zabbix, images allow us to view the bot system today for Windows, Linux, infrastructure, and networking processes.

The installation itself took about one to two hours. The lack of clear step-by-step procedures. There are procedures, but they're not very detailed or user-friendly.

There is a team of admins to supervise the product. 

Zabbix itself is free, but professional support is paid. They have different pricing tiers based on the category and enterprise level. You can find the detailed pricing policy on their website.

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

We mainly use it for server monitoring, like checking how much storage is available. For network devices, we use PRTG.

The most valuable feature is that it provides network segregation for server monitoring. The server selection is easy to use in Zabbix in comparison to PRTG. We want to move the Zabbix servers into PRTG. We use PRTG for network devices and Zabbix for server segregation for the initial days.

Zabbix is not easy to configure, and upgrading is also an issue. But for PRTG devices, we can configure it on our own within half an hour. Besides, Zabbix is not easy to understand. The interface we need to check and what steps are to be taken to do so needs clarification. The new joiners need help learning to utilize it as they need to check the steps individually. Also, there were graphs in the earlier version, but the present version has blocks and no graphs.

I have been using this solution for four to five years.

There are some glitches with the stability. Currently, 30 servers are using it.

It is easy to scale. It will have a few comments, and after running that, it will install. I would give it a seven out of ten.

The initial setup of Zabbix is complex as it is installed on Linux machines. Besides, every package has to be installed individually. Even if one package is missing, it will not be installed. So everything needs to be checked. It's too much of a headache. The solution got deployed on the cloud.

My company makes payments to Zabbix regularly, but I am not sure.

I will rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary use case is server and network monitoring.

The features I found most valuable are the user interface and a wide range of network devices that are easy to configure.

I would like for this solution to be more cloud-friendly.

I have been using this solution for about one year.

I would rate the stability of this solution a nine, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

Previously, we used Splunk and we switched because the solution's pricing was too high.

I would rate the initial setup process a seven, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best. Our model of deployment is on-premises.

This solution was used by 200 people in our company.

I would rate this solution an eight, on a scale from one to 10, with one being the worst and 10 being the best.

We use it to collaborate with each other internally as a company for video conferencing, meetings, teams, and those kinds of things. We implement it in customer environments as well for the same reasons, and also for eHealth solutions, for instance, in hospitals.

It improves the way we work, the way our customers work. With eHealth, for instance, surgeons can make appointments with patients at a distance and they can still see each other. That's very, very good.

The most valuable aspect is it's very robust. It has a lot of features and it also integrates with a lot of the Cisco hardware around it, such as Smartboards, video conferencing units, et cetera, et cetera, et cetera. It's a really robust and complete solution.

The initial setup is easy.

It's a stable solution.

We find the product scalable. 

The use is very straightforward. It's actually pretty much ready to go out of the box. It's very easy to start using it, to be honest.

You can also integrate it without Microsoft Office 365 and put it in the agenda of Outlook for instance, for meetings.

They've already added extra features, such as noise-canceling and facial recognition, which is great.

One of the things we don't like is that Zabbix has a license structure with a price that is high compared to the competition. It's very high, for example, compared to something like Microsoft Teams.

We have used the product since Cisco acquired it. It's been maybe ten years or so at this point.

The stability is great. There aren't bugs. It's not glitchy and it doesn't freeze. it's reliable.

The scalability on offer is good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. 

All of our people in the company in Europe use Zabbix for sure. That's at least 1,000. We also use it for events to stream video content, to customers, for instance, on a fairly large scale.

Technical support is very good. We have straight contact with the Cisco technical assistance center. If there is anything that has to be changed or improved, then we can directly call them.

We previously used Microsoft Teams. The number of possibilities in Zabbix was better than in Teams, and it also integrates very well with the hardware solutions from Cisco which was why we switched.

In general, the initial setup is very straightforward. It's not a difficult implementation process.

There isn't much staff needed for deployment or maintenance tasks. 

If more functionality is added to it, that might be a reason to use it more and more. However, as it is, at this point, we are already intensive users.

We buy the solution yearly. I'm not very aware of what the actual pricing and the licensing are, however, I know that for extra features, there is a possibility to buy a little bit more.

We looked at Zoom, however, we never ended up using it. 

Currently, we use it and we implement it as a partner.

We're always on the latest version. It's automatically updated via the cloud.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten.

Generally, it is used for infrastructure and network monitoring. We've been using it for monitoring systems and application infrastructure. It goes through the whole stack, and that's what we like about it. It can also be extended, but I wouldn't consider that as the primary use case. 

It can be deployed on-premise as well as on the cloud. It is meant to be on-premise, but some providers like us can use Zabbix on the cloud and provide it as a SaaS model. It is predominantly deployed on-premise. We mainly use versions 4.x and 5.x.

Just like any monitoring tool, the major benefits would be being proactive about and avoiding downtime and being able to do capacity planning of the infrastructure. It is about having more knowledge about what you own in terms of infrastructure. Once you do that, you're able to make educated decisions. They are not guesswork.

Its overall flexibility is most valuable. When our customers have some custom applications that are not necessarily covered by the community or a standard monitoring tool, we use Zabbix to build our own modules with our own templates. This feature has been useful in using Zabbix for infrastructure and IT monitoring. It has also been useful for industrial equipment monitoring.

Zabbix is very lightweight. It is efficient in terms of performance because it doesn't use a lot of resources. 

Its UI should be improved. They did some improvements in version 5, but it could benefit from some more work. 

Its integrations should also be improved. They've been active for one year, and they seem to have noticed that. It has new integrations, but it could benefit from more integrations. 

As far as I know, there is no model to push statistics, metrics, or events towards Zabbix. This type of API isn't yet there, whereas some other tools provide an API for this.

We have been using this solution for around five years.

It is very stable. We've had it in our customer environments for four years, and the only thing we had to do was to tune the database because we have more metrics. It never went down. 

One of our customers is monitoring a few hundred devices. It can be used for a few thousand devices without much complexity, but beyond that, it is difficult to scale. We don't use Zabbix beyond that, and we try to avoid it for larger deployments. You can create a distributed setup that helps with scalability. They have a distributed collector and a proxy that can be used for that.

It doesn't consume a lot of resources and is efficient in terms of performance. You can put it on a Raspberry Pi and monitor a few devices. If you push performance to the limit and have too many devices, I'm not sure how good it is then.

Our customers have subscribed to technical support, but they never really used their technical support. Zabbix has never failed. Our guarantee had expired, and we started our own maintenance on top of Zabbix with some government clients, but we never had to use Zabbix support.

Its initial setup is very straightforward. You need prior knowledge of Linux, but you don't need specific knowledge of Zabbix to deploy it. It is really straightforward and lightweight. Its deployment could take as little as one hour per person.

You simply download the packages. For a small deployment, you install them in the same box. There are three main components that you have to put in the same place, and that's it. It is not really complex to set up. Zabbix isn't really geared like some of the other solutions where there are different modules for each part. Zabbix is monolithic. You have a core system that can do everything, and it is extended with the plugins that provide additional integration and monitoring, but the framework and the UI are in one package or software.

You definitely need someone to administer the platform after it is deployed. Otherwise, it is a bad deal. The number of people required for maintenance depends on the site. It can start with someone part-time, and it can end with two full-time persons developing scripts and plugins. Post-deployment maintenance also depends on the monitoring requirements. You can't have a monitoring solution that is central to your network and sees everything but doesn't change as your network changes. If your network changes, your solution has to adapt to it, which is normal for all monitoring solutions. Similarly, if you have too many metrics, you would require some database tuning as the solution gets bigger. 

It is open source. If you want to have a subscription or official support, you can pay for it. They have different plans, which are not that expensive. The plans are based on per monitoring server, not per monitored equipment. So, it is not at all expensive, and you can also live without the support if you want a cheaper option.

We evaluated different solutions in 2012 and  2017. We favor open-source solutions or open-core solutions that support open-source models. These open-core solutions are not open source, but they have an open model. They come with plugins. Such solutions are the best because they offer flexibility, and you can add your own monitoring on top of them. You can add your own plugins and extend a solution beyond its original capabilities. A proprietary solution such as SolarWinds is not that flexible because it is closed. You have to find a suitable plugin or module, but you can't really develop something on top of it. There is an SDK, but it is really hard to use. I've never rarely seen it used.

Zabbix is a solution we offer to answer some of the main customer monitoring requirements . The solution that we go for depends on the environment in which it will be used. We select one of these depending on a customer's environment and prerequisites. We see whether a customer's environment is really rich, and how many customized and standard applications a customer has. Zabbix also has more integrations with on-prem infrastructure and cloud solutions.

In comparison with Nagios and alike solutions, Zabbix is less fragmented providing better integrated components. They also invested in the last years quite a lot of development efforts to build new custom integrations.

I would advise others to know scripting and Linux administration. These are the prerequisites. If you don't know these, you either have to get better at them or get an expert to help you. After this solution is deployed, you should have someone to administer the platform. Do not leave the platform as it is. It should evolve with the network. Otherwise, it becomes irrelevant.

I would rate Zabbix a nine out of ten. It is a very good product, and it is for a good reason that we have chosen Zabbix as part of our monitoring portfolio.

We have two Zabbix servers, deployed locally and in our New York datacenter, and we use them for monitoring traffic. It is an order processing system and we need to schedule and monitor our infrastructure.

Zabbix is very easy to implement.

The interface is customizable, so we can create the dashboard that we need.

We need to set it up step by step in order to ensure that it is stable and works properly.

If you want to use all of the features then you have to pay a licensing fee.

I have been using Zabbix for approximately one year.

We use Zabbix on a daily basis and we haven't had any issues with stability.

We have not needed to expand it because our infrastructure is very small. It includes a server and some VMs.

When we have a problem, we search the web site for how to resolve it. We have never had an issue that necessitated contacting technical support.

In my last job, I worked with Nagios. I found that Zabbix is a good system for monitoring and it is easier to implement, and it is also less expensive.

The initial setup is easy to do. It involves implementing agents in the server, but it is not difficult.

We implemented it with our in-house team that is also responsible for maintenance. This includes updates to the product. There is a team of three administrators who manage it.

Zabbix is free but if you use it in production then you have to pay for it. It is not expensive if you compare it to something like the Amazon monitoring system.

Also, it is an open-source product, although some features are available at an extra cost.

Overall, this is a great tool and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.