Share your experience using StableNet

We have deployed two major projects in Oman and Neom. We maintain the solution. I have a team of service engineers and configuration managers. The solution is like a manager of managers. When we have a mix of solutions like Cisco, HPE, and some legacy systems and want a single view of things, we use StableNet. The observation layer of different solutions feeds into StableNet. Configuration backup and performance are the solution’s strong points.

We can integrate any tool with StableNet. We don't need a separate solution for VoIP monitoring and device configuration. The product has a distributed approach between servers and their agents for remote sites.

The dashboard has a lot of room for improvement. The product must have the plug-ins ready for standard integrations.

I have been working with the product for around five years.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten. German technology is very stable.

I rate the tool’s scalability a nine and a half out of ten. I'm very happy with the scalability. The product is suitable for enterprise businesses.

The support team is more into R&D. They're not focused on support. The vendor lets the partners provide support for the solution. Partners must have StableNet-certified engineers. Complex problems arise for complex installations. When a problem is deep, it takes a lot of time to resolve it. It goes to the R&D and development teams. They do solve it, but the time taken could be reduced.

Neutral

I rate the ease of setup a seven out of ten. A lot of input is required from the customer because it's a complex installation. We can deploy the solution both on-premise and on the cloud. Most of our customers prefer private cloud providers.

Datadog is pre-integrated and easy to implement. StableNet is too vast. Sometimes, it is not pre-integrated. The product is very nice, though. We can do scripting in any language. It runs as a business process script. There is input on one side and output on the other.

My team does the configurations. The vendor is going through a major transformation. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for monitoring the device's performance and utilization.

The best features are the reporting, utilization, and network graph.

The solution is expensive.

I have been using StableNet for five years, and our organization has used it for over 20 years.

The product is stable. We never had any issues with StableNet.

The solution's scalability is good. Our organization monitors more than 300 terminals. There are three admins and 20 members who are monitoring the tool.

When there is an issue, we raise a ticket by ourselves. We explain everything about the issue, and customer support fixes it. StableNet offers a new feature, but when it is not working correctly. We raised a ticket regarding this. Also, when the application was not appropriately monitored, they helped us.

Neutral

The initial setup is difficult. It is a Linux-based solution.

StableNet is expensive compared to other monitoring tools like Webex and OpenConnect.

I recommend this solution. If you use the network device for the firewall, router, or switch, you should use StableNet. If you want to use it for a server, you can use Zabbix.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.