We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and Huawei eSight based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Management Applications solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of the solution are all of its security features...It is a highly scalable solution."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it gives some kind of ease in operations, especially since our company is moving from CLI to GUI-based configuration."
"The best feature of Cisco DNA Center is the visibility page, where you can see everything on the dashboard, and you don't have to be a technical person to view the issues."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"It is simple to manage and it is all done from a single dashboard."
"It is very versatile in terms of analytics."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features of Cisco DNA Center are wireless assurance and visibility."
"The product is stable."
"We can scale the solution."
"Huawei eSight provides businesses with monitoring capabilities of network devices across your network."
"eSight allows me to monitor and solve any problem in the backbone and any switch in real-time."
"We use Huawei eSight to monitor devices like Wi-Fi controllers, LAN switches, and routers."
"I like the real-time location monitor or RTLS feature. It is similar to the monitoring feature in Cisco Prime."
"I like that it supports all our Huawei devices. Unlike other network monitoring tools that monitor Huawei devices, it provides more details when it comes to monitoring or management. We can get complete details about the devices, and management is also simple."
"The most important features are alarm management and the visualization of the health of our network devices."
"DNA Center has been on the market for a few years and they need to update it."
"Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"The task failure reporting or provisioning failure reporting could be a little bit better in the UI, with more information given to the user."
"What could be improved is the licensing cost of Cisco DNA Center. It's a little bit expensive."
"The solution can be quite pricey."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"There is a limitation with the number of VRFs that you can have in your network, and this has caused us problems with some customers."
"It will be better if they can make the simple network topology part more presentable. It would also be better if they had API integration and integration with third-party devices."
"The price could be less costly."
"It is not a very flexible product."
"The solution needs to improve it's user interface to make it more modern and stylish. They need to design proper menu positions, features, etc. Right now the layout is complicated."
"Something that could be improved is the lack of integration with Cisco switches. In the next release, I would like to see better reporting."
"The solution and the operating system come separately. It would be easier if we did not have to deploy anything. A bundle feature would be better."
"eSight has many features and options, but sometimes, we feel that it should be more advanced, like Cisco. It would be good if they can enable some automation part in eSight. Most of our customers want automation in their network. They don't want a dependency on everything. That's why the automation part must be improved in Huawei. It will be beneficial for customers. Cisco has different products, and there are multiple products for monitoring, automation, etc. In the software-defined network, Cisco has ACI, and VMware has NSX. Such options must be there in Huawei to move to a software-defined network. Unlike Cisco, in the case of eSight, there is only one product. I am not aware of any other product. It would be good to enhance it with at least some automation options so that we can use it effectively in the campus network or big data center environment. When I implemented this Huawei solution, I faced some limitations in particular areas like wireless scanning. This is another part that they can improve. Wireless reporting option is not as effective as other monitoring solutions. For a particular use case, if a customer is asking for some reports, sometimes they are not 100% satisfactory. The reporting structure must be improved."
"This solution could be improved by offering monitoring for all devices and not only Huawei devices."
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Management Applications with 37 reviews while Huawei eSight is ranked 10th in Network Management Applications with 8 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while Huawei eSight is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Huawei eSight writes "Useful RTLS feature and good support but needs automation options and better wireless reporting". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Juniper Mist Wired Assurance and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Huawei eSight is most compared with Zabbix, Cisco Prime, PRTG Network Monitor, SolarWinds NPM and HPE Intelligent Management Center. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. Huawei eSight report.
See our list of best Network Management Applications vendors.
We monitor all Network Management Applications reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.