Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

We use it for monitoring network infrastructure and network servers.

Auvik monitors things that other tools don't monitor. It can monitor VMware, and Linux platforms. In addition, the automatic backup of network switches and changes to them is essential. It has positively affected the visibility our IT team has into remote and distributed networks. We can get into Auvik and see throughout the network. We can do discovery and see things that we can't see with other tools. And when the network is too stressed, we get notified. Out of all the tools out there, it's probably number two or number three among those we use. It's very critical for us.

The alerts go to our high-end guys because it's not monitoring desktops. It's notifying us of issues with equipment that only the engineers know how to operate, manage, and deal with. It's very handy for us and very important for us to prioritize which alerts are coming through to which people, so that the right people get them.

In terms of keeping device inventories up to date, it finds equipment that some of our customers never even tell us about. We have one customer with oodles of stuff but they had no idea what they had. They are a district utility and they have stuff everywhere. We know more about their network than they do, through Auvik.

The amount of time it saves us on setup management is significant. We used to have another tool that was good, but it was a nightmare to configure. Now, for every new customer, it probably saves us a minimum of 10 to 20 hours of work or more, depending on the size of the customer. On average, it's saving us about 10 hours.

It has also reduced our mean time to resolution because it's better at alerting us in the middle of the night when there is anything that looks more critical. It's quicker than other platforms. We see things before they happen, such as a hard drive failing inside of a RAID set, or a problem inside a VMware system before there is a bigger problem. We can be more proactive than we could be with the other tools that we have. I've seen some minor issue alerts from other tools, but a lot of time they can't see anything in a RAID set, but Auvik does.

Among the most valuable features are the 

• remote browser
• remote terminal
• remote tunneling.

Those features ease getting into our customer sites, especially ones that are a little more locked down. Instead of having to go through a VPN, log in to a system and do this or that to the platform, we can get to everything right through Auvik. It gives us immediate access to different things.

We have a single platform through Auvik, but it also integrates with all our RMM and management tools. Having a single integrated platform is extremely important. It does everything we need it to do within a single platform. Auvik doesn't do remote management monitoring, but it does everything else that our RMM cannot do and it's crucial. With it, we can see some pretty detailed information.

And while we haven't used Auvik extensively as an automation tool, we do use it to alert us and create tickets automatically. That saves us time.

When it comes to the management side, the navigation is a little bit difficult, going back and forth. It is a little bit cumbersome. The ease of movement is a little bit harder than it should be. If I go to one device and I look at an interface, I can't just go back to the device and that makes it a pain to navigate. If they could improve the navigation, that would be wonderful. It's a great tool but the interface is not great at times.

And Auvik is okay for helping visualize the network mapping and the topology for your organization, but it's not great.

Finally, reporting on alerts could be a lot easier.

We have been using Auvik for about three years.

The stability of Auvik is good. They do a lot of maintenance. They've had some issues over the years, but it is pretty stable. Out of 10, the stability is 9.5.

In terms of scalability, it does everything we need it to do. We have some pretty large environments and it does just fine.

It's a multi-tenant platform. We're a managed service provider. Our managed service customers range from a company that has about 400 or 500 devices to one that has over 1,000, and all the way down to customers that only have about 10.

I really haven't had a lot of interaction with their tech support. I've only had two or three questions and they answered them.

Positive

I used to use WhatsUp Gold when we were a much smaller company, but that product just did not scale with what we were doing. WhatsUp Gold was too difficult to use. I had to have VPNs for everybody and that didn't make any sense.

The initial setup of Auvik is pretty straightforward. We deploy it all the time now. We just onboarded another customer, the fifth in the last two months. We are able to use it very quickly after deployment, out-of-the-box; within hours. We only need two people involved in a setup.

If I compare the implementation time, alone, of our previous solution and Auvik, even for a small customer our old solution would take 10 to 15 hours. And if I had had to use the old platform for our largest customer, that would have taken me 80 to 100 hours. I only put in about five or six hours to get Auvik running for that customer.

We haven't had much training on it at all. We've had to discover a lot, but it works very well.

We deploy it on all our new customers and it is of tremendous value. I can see interfaces going up and down. I'm getting alerts on disconnects and that helps me troubleshoot spanning tree issues that are happening inside the network.

SNMP is critical because I can actually see inside VMware servers. With other platforms, that is very hard to find. I can see through a RAID set. The value is from the in-depth monitoring and the ability to see inside the hardware, rather than just if it is available or not. And in a Microsoft domain, it will tell me if there are any replication issues between domain controllers. It will tell me if there is a status issue. It's very handy.

The billing is excellent. The way they bill it, in most environments, it's not that expensive. The billing is very cost-effective.

I looked at a couple of other solutions. One of them was WhatsUp Gold, which we had been using. It's a great product, although it took forever to configure. Its navigation was great, but it took someone with high-end skills to understand how to do what needed to be done. 

Auvik makes it easy. It automatically finds things for you. I don't have to train someone for hundreds of hours to learn how to use it. The primary reason I wanted Auvik was SNMP. It discovers all the MIBs and pulls them. That's how it can monitor the things that other platforms don't. That's one of the features that make it a good product. I wanted it because we needed to see all the way down inside a device. For example, on a RAID set has a drive failed, or is there a problem with the NIC, or is there a problem with something inside the hardware? I didn't want to just know if it was available or not.

It's important to me that Auvik is cloud-based as opposed to an on-prem network monitoring solution. I have removed all my on-prem stuff, period, for security purposes. We're a security-focused company. Also, we're not that large, we're only 10 people, and we have enough work to do for our customers without having to maintain internal platforms. We just don't have time to do that. We had an on-prem solution for monitoring, but we went to Auvik in the cloud so that we don't have to maintain all that. It's one less thing we have to maintain.

My advice is to use this solution because it finds more detailed, granular information than other products, out-of-the-box.

We use the tool for network diagrams and troubleshooting, which has been helpful. One of the main issues we had before ANM was the lack of up-to-date network diagrams. With its dynamic function, we solved this problem. We also use it to troubleshoot network incidents such as APs going down and for automatic backups.

There are many things I like about the product. It's cloud-based and automatically refreshes the network container. We like the automatic backups and the comparison between backups. It's straightforward to set up, and it integrates with many protocols.

The tool provides an intuitive interface that's easy to use. The search box is particularly helpful—we can search for everything from MAC addresses to IP addresses to interface names, making it easy to find any device.

The network map and dashboard give us a real-time picture of our network. It's pretty easy to use these features to gain visibility, though we've had some minor issues with Meraki devices due to their lack of support for SSH and SNMP.

The solution has helped us automate our processes and integrates well with ConnectWise so that we can get alerts in our CRM and via email.

We noticed the full value of ANM after a few months, as we needed time to train and understand the system. It has helped our technicians due to its many capabilities and the data it collects. After about a month of training, we were able to share some of the senior team's workflows with junior team members.

ANM has helped us decrease our mean time to resolution by about 20 percent.

I'd like better integration with Meraki and a history feature for network diagrams. If a device fails on Saturday, we can't find it by Monday. A history or PDF export of diagrams would be great to see how devices should be connected.

I have been using the product for eight months. 

I rate the tool's stability as nine out of ten (it gets cloggy with large diagrams). 

We use the product on the cloud. Deployment was straightforward with the setup guide, initially taking about one month with a team of five people. Now, each new deployment takes about 15 minutes. We use it across many client enterprises and sites, with Windows, Mac, and Linux devices and multiple network brands. About ten people in our organization work with it. The cloud version needs no maintenance, but on-premises agents need checking.

The tool has saved us about 15 percent in return on investment.

The tool's pricing is reasonable. 

I recommend ANM for its updated network diagrams, ease of use and implementation, and high availability. Overall, I'd rate it nine out of ten.

As an IT company, we rely on Auvik, a network monitoring tool, to support our many clients. We install an Auvik agent on their networks, which then provides real-time monitoring. This allows us to be alerted of any issues, like a downed server, so we can promptly investigate and resolve the problem.

The interface is straightforward.

After familiarizing myself with Auvik, I could see the many benefits it offered.

Auvik empowered our entry-level technicians to resolve more tickets independently. It complements our existing internal monitoring tool. While the existing tool might initially flag issues like a server outage, Auvik provides additional insights for our technicians, helping them verify the information and identify potential false positives. This allows them to tackle problems more effectively without needing to escalate to senior staff.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on setup, maintenance, and issue resolution.

The most valuable feature is the alerting system. This ensures we're notified immediately of critical events, such as a server failure, allowing for a swift response and minimizing downtime.

I find the network map confusing and believe it could be improved by simplifying its layout or using clearer visuals.

The quality of technical support varies greatly. Some representatives are very helpful, while others are less so.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for three years.

There have been one or two instances where the Auvik website or portal seemed to be unavailable, but the actual appliances themselves seemed to be functioning normally. Overall, Auvik has been stable.

Auvik Network Management is scalable.

The technical support experience can be inconsistent. Sometimes we connect with fantastic technicians who solve our problems quickly. The customer service representatives are always friendly and supportive. However, occasionally we encounter technicians who suggest basic troubleshooting steps I've already attempted, like restarting or pinging. In these situations, I prefer immediate escalation. Thankfully, the escalation process through chat is usually swift, and the escalated representatives are very effective.

Neutral

While the initial deployment is straightforward, the overall deployment time will vary depending on our chosen option. On Windows machines, the process takes just five minutes, while Linux machines require approximately 20 minutes.

I start with a pre-configured Auvik collector packaged as an OVA file. I upload this file to VMware to deploy the collector. Once deployed, I SSH into the Linux machine and execute the necessary commands to update its firmware to the latest version. This completes the deployment process.

The implementation is completed in-house.

I would rate Auvik Network Management eight out of ten.

No maintenance is required.

I recommend spending some time familiarizing yourself with the portal. Once you're inside, you'll find it to be quite intuitive.

We use Auvik Network Management to monitor client sites for various network issues. Auvik provides us with a view of the entire network, including all connected devices. This allows us to visualize how these devices are interconnected and how data flows throughout the network.

A network topology map provides us with a near real-time picture of our network's activity. It constantly updates as scans run or new devices are added. Typically, within 30 seconds to a minute, the map reflects the new device, making it one of the most current representations of our network's state available.

The topology map is user-friendly. Nearly every element on the map is clickable, allowing us to zoom in on specific components with ease. This interactivity makes the map far more useful than a static image, as we can quickly drill down to the precise area we need to investigate.

Auvik's benefits were clear from the start. Previously, we lacked any tools to understand what was happening on our clients' networks. This made it difficult to work with potential customers. When visiting a site, we couldn't readily assess their needs and provide a quote for our services. Auvik's network discovery function was a game-changer. It revealed devices on customer networks they weren't even aware of, instantly justifying the investment. This level of visibility had been completely absent before. The previous tools we used were nowhere near as efficient. Additionally, Auvik's ability to monitor client sites and set up alerts provided invaluable insights, something else that was previously lacking. Overall, the value of Auvik was undeniable and immediate.

Auvik helps reduce the mean time to resolution of network issues. Auvik allows us to see exactly which device and port are experiencing issues. This significantly narrows down the problem area, especially in larger facilities. By pinpointing the exact switch and port, Auvik tells us precisely where to go to investigate and resolve the issue quickly, streamlining the process for the network team.

Auvik significantly reduces the time we spend on setting up networks, maintaining them, and resolving issues. Before using Auvik, our technicians had to perform lengthy site surveys. This involved the technician spending several hours at the customer's location, depending on the size of the site. During this time, the technician would physically examine network rooms, walk the entire building, and manually count the number of devices and their locations. This process required a significant amount of time analyzing the customer's site, including all the computers and other devices. In contrast, with Auvik, we can now map a complete network in under an hour. Auvik also automatically identifies the connected devices and the number of access points. This translates to a two-thirds reduction in the time a technician spends on-site gathering information.

The most valuable feature for us in Auvik is the network topology. This feature creates a visual map of all connected devices on the network, showing their location. This is incredibly helpful when we need to locate a specific device, as it significantly narrows down the search. Overall, the network topology is the functionality we utilize the most within Auvik.

The Auvik interface, while functional, doesn't feel as intuitive as some competing products. Compared to modern software, the design appears a bit dated. After using it for a couple of years, I've learned where things are located, but I still find myself occasionally clicking the wrong buttons because the layout isn't very logical. Overall, the interface could benefit from some improvements to make it more user-friendly.

The Ubiquiti line of network products is gaining significant popularity, but Auvik currently struggles to gather in-depth information from them. It's unclear whether this is due to a lack of communication between the two companies. It seems beneficial for both parties to explore a partnership to improve data availability. While Auvik emphasizes its close relationship with Ubiquiti, there's still an information gap compared to other vendors. It's difficult to say definitively if this is an issue with Auvik or Ubiquiti, but initiating contact between the right people at both companies could likely lead to a solution.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for two years.

Auvik Network Management is stable. We have never encountered a stability issue.

Auvik's scalability is very impressive. We haven't encountered any limitations on its capacity to handle our needs. In our experience, it seems to be adaptable for any size of network environment, from very small to extremely large.

Auvik's deployment process was straightforward. Their clear instructions, broken down into three steps, made it easy to follow. The system wouldn't allow us to proceed until the current step was completed, ensuring we didn't miss anything. There may have been some initial bumps a few years ago, but a recent deployment we did just a couple of weeks back showcased a noticeably smoother process. It seems Auvik has continuously improved its deployment experience.

While deploying the system, two people were involved. The second person's role was to ensure we were all in agreement on the desired functionalities and configuration. This was especially important for the advanced configurations, which went beyond getting the system to a basic functional state. The advanced configurations, such as defining the types of alerts and ensuring they weren't overwhelming, required a collaborative effort. It took a couple of people to sit down, think through them carefully, and analyze what truly mattered to avoid generating meaningless alerts.

The first deployment of our system did take a couple of weeks. This was because we were still refining the alerts and simply didn't know what to expect. We were unsure how background noise would affect the system's ability to detect silence. As a result, the initial deployment took longer to get everything configured exactly how we wanted it. Now, however, subsequent deployments are much faster. Typically, a new site can be up and running within a couple of hours, depending on the specific setup and credentials required. Overall, the entire process from start to finish is now generally completed within two hours.

The implementation was completed in-house.

Auvik offers two publicly available pricing tiers, but there are also additional options that require contacting a sales representative. Despite this, Auvik seems to prioritize customer needs. Their pricing models are generally clear and competitive. In fact, Auvik can sometimes be more affordable than some of the bigger players in the market. Through conversations with their sales team, we found that Auvik is willing to work with customers to ensure they can get started with the software, even if it means offering a customized license that fits their budget. This customer-centric approach was valuable to us.

In our search for a network management solution, we explored various products, but none quite fit the bill. Existing options didn't offer the comprehensive functionality we needed. Ultimately, we chose Auvik because it combined several functionalities we desired.

One competitor, RapidFire Tools, offered some network discovery features. However, their access limitations were a concern. We needed a tool with deeper network access than what they provided, which wouldn't have been readily granted on our clients' websites. Another contender, Domotz, also emerged later, but their hardware requirement on the network was a deal-breaker for us.

Auvik, on the other hand, seemed to seamlessly work with any network-connected computer. Its scanning capabilities were far superior to both competitors. Additionally, the ability to map the network topology comprehensively without requiring extra hardware solidified our decision. We tested Domotz for three months and RapidFire Tools for a year. The year-long contract was the only option available. While both ran concurrently, our initial exposure to Auvik at an industry event presentation, sparked our interest.

Upon setting up the Auvik trial, we were impressed by the salesperson's ability to grasp our client needs quickly and demonstrate the tool's functionality effectively. This helped us realize the value proposition almost immediately. Auvik's superior feature set, compared to the others, stood out. The ease of setting up and getting started further solidified our choice. In fact, our team was convinced of Auvik's value before the trial even reached its halfway point. It was that good.

I would rate Auvik Network Management eight out of ten.

Some critical devices on our network are not currently billed for because Auvik cannot monitor our Ubiquiti firewall. This lack of monitoring means we can't even tell if a device is up or down, which is crucial information. Fortunately, we've found some workarounds to gather basic information about these devices for our Auvik network monitoring system. The good news is that the support representatives have confirmed these workarounds won't incur any additional billing. They've even offered to help us implement them. While these devices won't be fully monitored through their standard system, the support team has gone the extra mile to ensure we can still gather some essential information about their status within our network.

Auvik is a self-updating system. Once we set it up, there's minimal ongoing maintenance required. The only time we typically need to revisit the software is when we add new equipment to the network. In those cases, we simply ensure Auvik recognizes and inventories the new devices. Otherwise, Auvik runs seamlessly in the background. We only interact with it again when an alert pops up, notifying us of a network issue that requires attention.

The most important advice I can offer is to be prepared for the learning curve associated with Auvik's interface. Navigating the interface and finding specific features can be the most challenging aspect initially. However, once you become familiar with the layout, Auvik's capabilities are extensive. While the interface might not be as intuitive or modern as some users expect, rest assured that Auvik can handle any network management task you need it to perform. Just be patient as you become acquainted with its functionalities.

We use Auvik for monitoring and alerting on customer environments.

We lacked visibility into specific aspects of our Local Area Network. Therefore, we required a solution capable of monitoring and alerting us about port activity and other relevant information at the switch level.

Although Auvik does require some experience and knowledge within IT, it is easy to use. Auvik works relatively well with a great intuitive interface.

Auvik's ease of use makes it easy to get to the root of the problem.

Auvik's network map provides a real-time picture of our network as long as the agent is up.

The only waiting time we faced was for the agent's installation and subsequent discovery process. This typically took around 24 hours to ensure it had enough time to identify all network devices.

Before implementing Auvik, we could not readily determine switch outages. This necessitated manual inquiry and on-site troubleshooting. Fortunately, Auvik has cut our mean time to resolution down by 50 percent.

Auvik's reliability is impressive. It effectively alerts us to switch outages and high port utilization, making it a perfect fit for our needs. We are extremely satisfied with Auvik and have no plans to switch to another solution.

While Auvik provides us with good network visibility, there are some features we'd like to see implemented in the future. Specifically, we're looking for an alert system that notifies us when new devices are added to the network. For example, one of our customers experiences recurring issues with an unidentified router appearing on their network. Unfortunately, Auvik doesn't currently alert us when this ghost router appears.

I would like Auvik to alert on IP conflicts. Although it doesn't happen often, we sometimes see duplicate entries for IP addresses.

I have been using Auvik for six years.

We have never had any stability issues with Auvik.

Auvik is highly scalable. We currently use it on networks ranging from small shops with around 40-50 workstations to larger locations with 500-600 endpoints. I am confident that it can easily scale to even larger networks.

I have contacted Auvik's support team a few times and they were consistently great. Their resolution time was super quick.

Positive

The initial deployment is extremely easy. If we have an understanding of the customer's environment, the deployment takes five minutes and one person to complete.

The implementation is completed in-house.

Auvik's pricing falls within an acceptable range for us. While management typically handles pricing negotiations, I haven't heard any concerns from them suggesting Auvik's cost is excessive.

I would rate Auvik ten out of ten.

Auvik does most of the maintenance and they advise us before they do it.

I recommend trying Auvik with a trial version if possible, followed by the available Auvik training. While the initial training is not mandatory, I highly encourage newcomers to try the software first to get hands-on experience. This will make the subsequent training, if available, much easier to grasp.

We utilize Auvik for monitoring our clients' environments. 

It plays a highly critical part in our operations. A part of the product that we sell to our clients involves a service level agreement that we will respond to within X amount of time, and we'll monitor their environment for them. Because of that, this plays an absolutely critical function.

The collectors that they use are constantly connecting to Auvik to make sure that you're aware that it's active, it's running. You would think all of the other monitoring solutions out there do the same thing, and many do claim that, but most can't deliver that, whereas Auvik can. There have been many times when some of our other tools that are also monitoring things should be reporting that there's an outage at a location or a server is down or something like that, but that's just not the case. With those other tools, it doesn't even blip on their radar that the system is completely hard down and it's a big issue, whereas, with Auvik, the moment a collector disconnects, and it has been disconnected for the amount of time that we defined, it immediately alerts us and says, "We can't communicate with this machine." It's really handy. You can sell the feature all day long, but if that feature doesn't work, it's not a real feature. Auvik works. It's very reliable, at least from our experiences so far.

I enjoy it when it comes to visualizing the network mapping/topology for the organization. It doesn't just provide a network map. It gives us a global view, an actual Earth view, and it allows us to see where the devices are physically located, which is very handy. Especially if we need to dispatch something or if we need to compare a power outage to maybe a storm that's passing by, it gives us the map and visual of where a device is located. When you drill down into it, you can click on the actual nodes that are on the map and go down as granular as you want. You can see the actual network topology of the environment. It does a pretty good job of figuring out how it's all laid out. You've got a collector from Auvik that's sitting there, and it explores and discovers the devices. So far, I haven't seen an instance where it couldn't figure out the exact network topology. There's always this rare case where something gets kind of wonky in regard to how your server is set up. You might have multiple connections coming in or whatever, but so far, it has been able to define all that. That's something that a lot of people don't realize is normally a manual task. You have to break out Visio and start dragging and dropping a lot of icons, name it yourself, define the IPs, etc. Auvik does it automatically, which is just cool.

Our client environments are not a single vendor product. There are multiple vendors coming in from different directions. We deal in data systems, which is the industrial automation type of stuff that deals with wastewater treatment plants, water treatment plants, etc. Due to the nature of our business, being able to have an accurate inventory of what's at what site, what's the IP address, or what are the specs on a server is super important.

It provides an integrated platform for a few brands. It doesn't provide a fully integrated platform for all the brands and manufacturers out there. It's probably a little bit more skewed toward Cisco products, which we don't use a lot. It would be nice if they had full integration into Dell's tools, as well as VMware for Hypervisor and things like that. Having a single integrated platform would save us a lot of time across the board. Currently, we have to use Auvik for monitoring. It's probably the most reliable one that we have so far. We've used quite a few in the past, including Ninja, some Microsoft options, and several others. Everyone promises it, but far and few can truly deliver a single pane of glass experience. The Auvik tool gives us a single pane of glass for all of the monitoring needs, and then, if we need to drill into on a system-by-system basis and remotely manage the system and remote into a machine, we have to use other tools for that.

My favorite feature so far is the alerts section. We've got our main company at the top, and then all of our customers are underneath that. We can either filter by a single customer or one of their sites specifically, or look at it from the top down and see the whole picture. It's an easy way for me to be able to have a high-level overview. I can see the status of all of our sites simultaneously without having to really dig in and get super granular unless I want to. It gives that ability too, which is cool.

The functionality on a PC is definitely better than in a mobile environment. If you are logging in to Auvik on your phone or on a tablet, it's a little janky at times, but on a PC, it's fantastic.

If I could make a wish list of things that I would like to see from Auvik, I would definitely love to see more vendor integration with specific manufacturers. They've got that integration with Cisco, but it would be awesome to also have that with other major brands, such as HP, Dell, and Lenovo. It should have integration with more vendors, and in general, being able to quickly and easily access vendor-specific tools from the portal would be amazing. A real-life case scenario would be that we know that Dell servers have iDRAC cards on them, which allows for remote control and a remote KVM keyboard, video, and mouse functionality. It would be nice to be able to have the direct link baked in and be able to quickly just say, "I need to remotely manage this machine," and then you can just click, and you're in. In regards to VMware, VMware is one of the top three hypervisors for virtualization. It would be awesome to be able to quickly and easily identify that this is the VMware cluster, this is the ESXi server, and this is a vCenter. We should be able to quickly and easily log into consoles and remotely manage things as needed from there. This kind of functionality for the Cisco products is baked into Auvik right now, but it doesn't exist for other manufacturers. It's one of those things that will happen as time goes by. They need to make sure that it's embedded and done properly and that they're working with the manufacturers directly, instead of trying to duct tape a solution.

The other improvement would be more on the software side of things in terms of understanding that patch management happens and vulnerabilities are security patched all the time. There should be more direct integration with Microsoft updates. Pretty much everyone uses Windows, and being able to easily identify that there's a patch pending, and maybe even be able to push it, would be awesome.

My direct experience with Auvik has been since August.

In terms of full stability, which also includes their response to security issues, I would rate it a 9 out of 10.

The sky's the limit. There don't seem to be any actual limits on the number of collectors that you're able to deploy. We started out at 40, and we're at 63 right now. It scales easily and effortlessly. So, I would rate it a 10 out of 10 in terms of stability.

It's decent. It's a little difficult to get a hold of them sometimes, but, overall, it's not bad. Comparing it to the big three computer manufacturers, Dell, HP, and Lenovo, they fall in Dell's mid-tier level support. It's pretty decent.

Positive

We use multiple tools. We went for Auvik because of its dependability. We have to have a reliable report as to what's up and what's down. Ninja is great on a surface level, but it doesn't update live. It has a periodic updating process. You don't really know when it's going to update next. You would expect it to be live, but it's not. Having accurate, live information was the reason why we started with Auvik.

This isn't just a one-application show for us. We've got Auvik. We've got Ninja, and we've got several other tools that we use for monitoring to cover redundancy and any spillover situation. By far, Auvik is the cleanest. It's the most up-to-date. It's the most accurate. Ninja, for example, is a decent competitor against Auvik's platform. Ninja reports things, but the information is very clustered up and very hard to read and discern. Once you get used to it, you're okay, but on your first experience with Ninja, it's horrible. Auvik is very clean. It has that modern look and feel to it. Anybody who uses modern apps and web apps is going to be able to quickly and easily figure out his or her way through it.

The most important thing when comparing Auvik versus other competitors is that we have found Auvik to be the most reliable. It will report when things are out. It will report everything based on how we have it set up and defined. This reliability is very important. Ninja is great, and as a team, when we were using only Ninja, and we weren't utilizing Auvik at all, Ninja would report things, but it wouldn't always report that live, up-to-date view of what's going on. You might have alerts saying, "Oh, it's out." You're like, "No. No, we cleared that alert. Why is it still showing that?" There's no real easy way to discern how to clear the alerts if it just doesn't detect it automatically, whereas Auvik is always up to date. It's always communicating, and if it ever drops that communication, it immediately notifies you, which is awesome.

The alerts that are provided to us correspond and correlate directly to the SLAs that we are selling and promising to our clients. So, in the event of a full outage or whatever, it gives us the ability to quickly and easily identify that there is an outage at this site, and it's this device that is currently causing the problem, or we haven't had any communication for X amount of time to this IP address. We are then able to say, "Okay, this is a high priority because it's affecting outage, and it's affecting the service for our client," whereas, something like when disk-based utilization is 80% has a high priority, but it's not a major issue. Auvik allows us to quickly and easily prioritize types of incidents, for example, outage versus 80% storage. It allows us to clarify whether something is an incident or not.

I was not involved with the setup, but I was involved in the sourcing and options. That was me working with the company, before I actually worked with the company directly, and looking at all the different options that were out there. Auvik seems to be the one that made the most sense. In regards to the setup process, I can see that the general setup itself as an administrator is not difficult. It takes 15 to 30 minutes on average. You can add in some videos to watch if you want to figure out how to do something or whatever, and you're probably going to be up and running within about two hours.

It doesn't require any maintenance. It does that itself. It updates its own collectors. You have to just install the collector. Once that's installed, it'll update itself. Outside of that, it's a web or cloud tool. It's software as a service. So, they handle all the maintenance and things like that on the backend from there.

Being a cloud solution, the always-on communication between Auvik and its collectors gives you that real-time status, and it's amazing. With an on-prem solution, if something goes wrong with your equipment, that's going to cause issues. If you're doing it even in your own private spot or even public cloud or whatever, you're having to control that kind of infrastructure, environment, and things like that. It's one of those things that annoys people when they see that there's going to be an outage for a tool because of updates, maintenance, and things like that, but Auvik has been always on the spot making sure that we're aware, "Hey, heads up on this date at this time, maintenance on these machines is going to be happening. These are the things that will either function or non-function. These are things that are going to be changing and so on, so forth." I've also seen several instances where they responded to a security threat, and they did that really quickly. Our outage time on that from Auvik was measured in minutes. If we were doing that and hosting it ourselves, even though we have a decently-sized team, we don't have the time to do all that kind of work. Monitoring and maintaining all that is amazing with the whole cloud option.

It's hard to measure what it's providing. However, considering the cost that we are paying in regards to what we're getting out of it, it has easily paid for itself within the first few months just based on our current deployment environment. We have to have accurate information. We have to know when something is up and down, and if it's not, we break SLA, our service level agreement, with our clients. If we do that, we have to pay money to our clients because we broke contracts. One broken contract is going to cost us five grand, and this prevents us from losing that, so it's awesome.

There is a reduction in our mean time to resolution. When we were using just Ninja, we wouldn't even be aware that there was an issue until Ninja just had an update. Now, we're aware within the timeframe that we assigned, which is 15 minutes, that communication has been lost. We give it a couple of minutes to make sure that it's not just an internet blip or whatever, and then we're able to quickly attack it. With Ninja, we wouldn't even be aware until a customer calls us to say something is broken. It's time lost in regards to the fact that we should have been aware of it before the customer even had a chance to pick up the phone and do that.

To someone comparing network monitoring solutions but concerned about price, I would say that it's the cost of doing business. It's just the fact that it's going to cost something. The amount of money that you're spending on these tools is a fraction of what you would be paying for an individual to be doing the same thing live as a person. I believe that our bill is somewhere around the $600 range per month. We're monitoring about 63 machines. Most of them are servers. So, $10 to monitor it for an entire month is amazing. You couldn't get somebody in India for that cheap.

We definitely evaluated other options. We use Ninja in-house, so it was one of the first things that we originally evaluated. We also evaluated ConnectWise and a few others. It was not very difficult to pull up a list of the competitors and look at them all. We originally had decided on Ninja because it was something that most people knew about, but then we're like, "Yeah, it's great when it works, but it doesn't always work." That's when we started looking at the other options, and we landed on Auvik.

It's a newer company on the horizon. They're still developing features. You can tell that. So, if a feature that you are wanting isn't available, give it time. It'll probably come.

It takes a little bit of time to get used to. When I first started, back in August of this year, I was getting my feet wet with Auvik as a tool. I had heard of it, but I never really personally used it and experienced it. I've been in my IT field for well over 16 years, so it's not like I'm not capable of understanding how to use something. One of the things that come into play is understanding that the default view that you see is like a zoomed-out version. Being able to traverse that, being able to go back and forward, and understanding where you're at in the tree takes a little bit of time to get used to and follow.

On top of that, there's the reporting functionality below it, where it's reporting alerts and things like that. At first glance, you're like, "Oh, everything's fine. There are no alerts," but then you realize that you are only looking at the last 15 minutes or the last three hours or whatever. You need to understand that there's that little date field midway on the right side and of purple color that you choose to select the date range that you're looking at. It will automatically redraw and redo things based on the selected range, and you can drill down into whatever system you're connected to, which is really cool.

We haven't experienced much automation so far. Right now, we're using it just as a reporting tool, but it's something that we're looking at doing. Outside of that, it's just reporting and doing the network discovery and watching for outages and any types of alerts. The process of doing that is kind of pseudo automation just in the fact that that's what Auvik sells as their core option or whatever. As a reporting tool, it's great, but so far, we haven't really dug into many of the integrations or functionalities past that.

It hasn't helped our team focus on high-value tasks while delegating low-level tasks to junior staff because, in our environment, we're all equal peers. We all have our own specialties, per se, such as networking versus storage or VMware versus Hyper-V, but, in general, we're all of the equal stances.

As a solution for monitoring and things like that, it's awesome, and I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

We use Auvik to monitor net flow within our primary core switch and firewall. We look at the health and traffic flow alerts from our wireless access points or switches.

We don't use any of the automation features. Our company uses Auvik strictly for managing alerts. Auvik acts as a dashboard to give us oversight and a sense of the overall network health. We don't do a lot of troubleshooting within Auvik. It's more of a documentation and dashboard tool that lets me see all the problems and drill down.

We only have one location where we're using Auvik, but we're expanding to a second location under construction and being rebuilt. We'll eventually have two more locations. We want to monitor multiple sites and how they interact because we use SD-WAN between the sites.

We previously had multiple solutions, and implementing Auvik has saved me a lot of time because I'm solely responsible for the infrastructure. I probably save an hour or two daily on my morning run-throughs, so it has saved the company the equivalent of a part-time employee each month. 

In addition to saving time, we get better traffic insights. We can look at the entire inventory from a networking standpoint. It lets us see all our pieces and what's online, like a network topography. If somebody submits a ticket about internet issues in one of the areas, I can check that area to see how many other things are affected. It makes troubleshooting smoother. You can more effectively triage a problem because you have more information in front of you.

Auvik keeps our device inventories updated. We pair it with our asset management platform to double-check if things are discovered that haven't been asset-tagged. We want to see if the things that are live on the network match what we have in our asset management platform.

Auvik also helps me delegate. I can see alerts on the endpoints that are not necessarily licensed, but it gives us traffic insights. I can message the person at the help desk, "Hey, I noticed we're having Wi-Fi issues in this area. Can you check the staff computers on Ninja and see if anybody is having any issues?" They can go in remotely and communicate with the staff to see if they have noticeable issues. Is it an advisory thing we're seeing or something deeper that must be solved on the network side? Maybe it's on the endpoint side?

Keeping our devices updated helps me take the pulse of each device. We use a remote management platform like an MDM, but then we also use ScalePad as a cost and inventory platform. Auvik tells us if all these things are up and running. There are three of us on the team, and each tracks inventory differently. Whenever we do annual inventory, we pull MAC addresses and devices to see what's in use and the usage rate. It helps a lot at the end of the year. Inventory takes an hour instead of a week.

Auvik helps us get ahead of the curve, so we can see many potential issues before they become problems. We'll get alerts for particular items before getting a ticket. In those cases, we can say, "I noticed you've been having some issues with Wi-Fi and sporadic connectivity. Is your computer okay? Are you having issues?" 

It depends on the person, but most people don't like to complain and don't want to go into the trouble of sending in a ticket or anything like that. When you can get ahead of that and reach out to them, it's a great value.

I like Auvik's mapping. Your home dashboard has a map view where you can see potential issues on the endpoints. If an AP or switch has a problem, you can drill down into those to see how it's affecting the endpoints.

The monitoring and management features are straightforward. Getting everything configured is a little tricky, but it's easy once everything is set up. The management is highly intuitive. It has tons of little tools you can use for your hardware. You can monitor network traffic, device health, and lifecycle management within an easy-to-use dashboard.

Auvik provides a single integrated platform that covers everything. We are considering adding our primary servers to get utilization stats and different telemetry from our primary hosts for our on-site VMs. Having all the features on a single platform is crucial. We use many services and platforms, and it's convenient to log into one dashboard and see everything from a bird's eye view.

It's super easy to use. Everything is easily mapped out. If you've navigated any website, it should all be intuitive. It's easy to lift a pane and see all the general areas. As you click into each site, you can drill down into each area you want to see.

People who don't dive as deep into the infrastructure as I do can go onto the site to see the dashboard and get a sense of the network's overall health. I don't need to push out reports and share alerts constantly. I'm the only one getting those, and the other team members can see from a bird's eye view whenever they're looking into things or trying to troubleshoot.

I would like a Power BI-style dashboard that you could show to a non-technical person with metrics like the number of devices accessing wireless, the amount of internet, total issues resolved each month, etc. 

Those kinds of features would be nice, but that's more of a feature for executives. Many platforms are adding these features because they understand in-house IT staff need to deliver those reports to management.

We used Auvik with our MSP for a time. It was an account through somebody else. This month, we started using it as the primary account. In total, we've been using it for a year and a half.

We haven't had any issues. I've been able to load the website from any location without any lag or delays.

One reason we chose Auvik was its ability to scale for multiple locations. It's effortless to scale by adding different locations. We have it at our headquarters and plan to add our Central Austin location, then go from there. Within the organization, it's easy to build out and add.

We used Meraki's built-in monitoring platform because we have a full Meraki stack. We used the topography and alert systems there, but it lacked many features because you're only seeing the network side. You don't see any of the devices. You could see some insights, but Auvik provides much more clarity.

I like Auvik's secure cloud-based solution and the ability to check the dashboard no matter where I am. If I'm remote and looking at multiple sites, I don't have to worry about VPN connections. I don't need to worry about opening the ports. It's huge for us to see everything from multiple sites.

Setting up Auvik was straightforward, but sometimes you forget the passwords when setting up SNMP or Syslog. We had to go back and look for passwords, but that wasn't Auvik's problem. 

It was simple to deploy Auvik right out of the box. All we needed to do was get our SNMP credentials and input the subnets I wanted to scan. I deployed it by myself, and it took less than one day. I probably spent about four hours on it.

After deployment, Auvik hasn't required any maintenance. The only thing that I've had to do is change the password for an SNMP credential if I got it wrong, but that's about it.

We saw immediate value from Auvik. I think it's brand and device agnostic, which is incredible. The time to value was almost instant because we could see everything. We didn't have to go onto a Netgear portal, a Meraki portal, Azure AD, Intune, RMM, etc. We can see everything on one dashboard. The time to value was the time it took to implement: less than a day.

Auvik is much simpler to set up and maintain than my previous solution. It's night and day. Dealing with multiple platforms and solutions was unwieldy. Time is money. Having everything combined is a value-add and saves a lot of money. We no longer need to outsource this and have somebody monitor it. Bringing all the monitoring in-house saves us $2,000 a month, easily on top of all the other support hours we've saved.

Auvik's pricing is spot-on. It's one of the better values I've seen. 

I tried Netskope and SolarWinds, but they were both somewhat clunky. At times, things can get over-engineered. It's like a lousy buffet where all the food is mixed in. That's what I feel with some platforms.

I rate Auvik nine out of 10. If you're thinking about implementing Auvik, I recommend watching videos online before deployment. Watch the videos for ideas and attend demos so you can ask questions ahead of time. 

We deployed so easily because all the questions were answered before we started. We did our research and watched videos when we were checking out Auvik. Auvik was at the top of our list, but we looked at other solutions and didn't find anything that came close. 

We are an MSP that monitors various customers' infrastructure, including firewalls and switches. We use Auvik for monitoring and creating network diagrams. Our environment consists of a data center with VPNs for each site we monitor and manage. 

From the data center, we have a probe where we can access every device we manage. We authenticate in the cloud and access the monitoring on-prem.

The network visualization Auvik provides is critical. The only clue we get as an MSP is, "My internet is not working." Getting alerts that separate all these services and companies helps us pinpoint the correct location of the issue and saves time. That increases customer satisfaction because we can resolve their issues quicker.

Auvik saves lots of time. The network mapping and diagrams make it easier to do inventories and check the lifecycle of devices. You have to spend time configuring things the way you like. It does an excellent job of monitoring, but I think it takes more time to tailor to your needs than other monitoring systems.

Auvik's auto-detection feature is something I haven't seen in other monitoring systems. We can keep track of our internal device tables to map the devices on the network. The diagram saves us a lot of time. Usually, our new customers don't provide much information about their networks, so we need to spend a lot of time logging into every single device, going into the CDP and LLDP, making nodes, building diagrams, and adding more information. Auvik does it instantaneously.

When we can recognize what devices are connected in the table, we can easily find out, for example, what networks are passed through the devices, which is also very useful. Otherwise, we would need to download the configuration and start building our database of networks. It provides a simple way to look at many devices and subnets.

I've been finding some features difficult. It might be because I'm used to PRTG, and Auvik works differently. When it comes to monitoring a simple IP address, Auvik makes it a bit harder and more complex because you have to create a service inside the site. It's not just creating a sensor and having it ping the device. You need to go to the site and create the service. 

The service must be created from either the device or the ping cloud. When you create many services because you need to ping or monitor several IPs, it can be challenging to find all the services because you have to go into the services. Once you are in the services, you must search for the main item. Inside the main item, you see the services. It's a little bit harder to work with.

With PRTG, you open the main website, and all the sensors are on the main screen. It's more intuitive. Auvik's technology is better. The design and functionality are more practical, but it's more expensive as well. But I think it's easier to use PRTG without any training because it's more intuitive. Auvik is not that intuitive. I had to open several cases to figure out how to create a ping sensor. Sometimes, you can't modify them as you like. You have to create it this way, and there are no options.

I don't think you can modify the names of the services. After discovery, you must create it repeatedly because you can't modify the conventional names. For example, if you're looking for all the sensors from this specific ISP, we can name the sensors by site, ISP, and IP address. It's easier to manage because I can ask it to give me all the IPs from Comcast. It's not one site. It's all over the place.

While Auvik provides everything in a single interface, I don't use it because it's slow. From Auvik, I can SSH or HTTP a device, but I'd rather use Putty or mRemote because I'm old school. I open mRemote and have all the devices on one site. From Auvik, I have to open the platform, authenticate it, search for the site, and search for the option. It takes more clicks, and if you're doing it every day for several devices per day, I would rather use mRemote to connect to the devices remotely.

Network visualization can also be complex. If the network follows the rules, it makes a good diagram. However, an ISP might sometimes be connected to a switch connected to three other switches in a row, like a daisy chain. For some reason, that's where the provider connects at the last mile. In those cases, Auvik makes fancy diagrams that are not very intuitive. Auvik makes excellent diagrams if you have everything structured with the firewall, core switch, distribution switches, and access switches. We don't use the device inventory feature. Instead, we rely on an Excel sheet. We can't add every device to Auvik because it is costly.

I have been using Auvik for a little more than two years.

It is highly stable.

Auvik's scalability is excellent.

I rate Auvik support nine out of 10. I've contacted them a few times. You can reach support quickly through chat. Maybe the chat doesn't have much access to the device, but it would be nice if I opened the chat from my session and they already had my information and configuration. Maybe they don't do it for privacy, but that would save some time.

Positive

I previously used PRTG but switched to Auvik when I joined this company. I don't know why this company uses Auvik. It could be because Auvik has more design. It has more features running, and they are built-in, so you only need to figure out how to configure it. Once you post the credentials necessary to get information about a server via WMI or SNMP, gaining more insight from the devices is very useful. 

I haven't seen WMI on other monitoring systems. I might not search for it, but I know Auvik does it. We haven't used it, and I believe it doesn't charge for the servers or Windows machines. If you want to monitor everything, like computers and network devices, Auvik might be a better deal in terms of features and pricing. I'm monitoring every computer and network, which might require many sensors. I understand that Auvik will monitor the Windows devices for free, if I'm not mistaken.

Auvik saves a lot of time for network discovery and device inventory by getting the information from the devices for networking.

I'm not on the procurement side, but I understand that the license is based on devices, not sensors. If you have 10 switches and one firewall, you count per device. You'll have 100 devices if there are 10 sites with the same setup. I think it's much more expensive to monitor 100 sensors in PRTG. 

The pricing is monthly per device. Some other monitoring systems charge an annual license, giving you a set number of sensors, like 1,000  or 2,500. This is what I've been seeing, but I'm not the one who purchased the solution. 

If someone is concerned about price, maybe Auvik is not the right solution. If they're genuinely worried about the cost, it might be better to use an open-source or free network monitoring solution. If they want to invest in something, maybe the second step would be something like PRTG. Companies with a lot of resources might try SolarWinds. 

I wasn't involved in the decision-making for Auvik. I believe it was more of a management decision than a technical decision. For managers, Auvik is an attractive solution. It might be less attractive from a technical point of view, but it looks fine to them. It has a fresh design, great graphs, excellent website design, and nice integration features. Maybe it looks better than other options from a sales perspective.

I rate Auvik seven out of 10.