We performed a comparison between Alluvio AppResponse and TruView based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"When it comes to the ability to scale up the product, this is suitable for small medium and large environments,"
"We really like the scalability capabilities."
"I have found the AppResponse, which is a packet capture solution, very good. It gives you the ability to drill down back in time. You've got all the packets there. You can troubleshoot it later, not immediately. It's very interesting."
"Ability to see end to end user, application, server, and network response time and throughput data."
"The most valuable feature is performance monitoring."
"The most valuable feature of Alluvio AppResponse is the actual response time for measuring performance."
"It provides us with complete visibility of every packet."
"With some APM solutions, it can take a long time to check a periodic report, but you can get all the necessary details quickly with AppResponse."
"The most valuable feature for us was the ability to monitor sites and get a nice overview of all the data in a single view."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The pricing is on the higher side of things. If they could lower it, that would be ideal."
"If Alluvio AppResponse reduces its cost, it will be more beneficial for customers to monitor their application and network performance."
"Integration between NPM and APM solutions would improve efficiency. There is no agent on the server site related to AppResponse."
"The AI features should be addressed in respect of the analysis and intelligence that must be supported and delivered in the tool to predigest the large amounts of data."
"Technical support needs to be more responsive."
"They need to better integrate with products and solutions from different vendors."
"Need to bring back the NetFlow module for AppResponse."
"Alluvio AppResponse should improve its ability to expand across multiple operating systems."
"One area that could be improved is the reporting features. In the version transformation from ten to eleven, the platform changed from a Windows-based platform to a Linux-based platform. As a result, the previous reporting feature using Crystal Reports was no longer available. Instead, we had to generate PDF dashboard reports, which were not as flexible."
Alluvio AppResponse is ranked 50th in Network Monitoring Software with 15 reviews while TruView is ranked 54th in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews. Alluvio AppResponse is rated 8.8, while TruView is rated 9.6. The top reviewer of Alluvio AppResponse writes "It's a total solution that gives you end-to-end visibility at all levels". On the other hand, the top reviewer of TruView writes "We lacked visibility into network and app performance, so we chose Visual TruView to proactively manage our network". Alluvio AppResponse is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, ThousandEyes, Dynatrace, AppDynamics and Cisco Secure Network Analytics, whereas TruView is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and Softinventive Lab Total Network Monitor.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software 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.
I am also a newbie for AANPM but it's important to give efficient application performance delivery.
I've had good experiences with Fluke products.
Regards,
K.Satish kumar
Yes there are other vendors to consider. Cisco integrates the WAAS ( wide area application acceleration services) platform as part of their data center product portfolio. Typically suited towards enterprise deployments. There is also Silverpeak, which has some easily configurable "plug and play" solutions catered more towards the small/medium size market. It really comes down to a various factors when choosing the correct platform, here are some to consider for product evaluation:
- application type
- compression requirements
- bandwidth requirements
- manageability
- operational functionality/support
My team and I have extensive experience with these deployments.
Let me know if you'd like to discuss this further.
Thanks !
On premise based solutions we have tried over the years:
Fluke Optiview
NetScout
CA NetQOS
Solar Winds
LanCope (currently in use by our corp/UC team... scaling for Data Center
is expensive)
Cloud based solutions tried by our developers:
SevOne
Boundary
SFlow reference on collectors
www.sflow.org
The point to know when comparing, is to see how many flows you need to
analyze. Most Netflow products will dig into the top 20 flows. I need to
look into the top 1000... there is a vast difference in Netflow collectors
ability to handle huge flow volumes.
Also something to consider, is whether your network gear can handle full
flows, or just sampled flows. Most SFlow gear (F5, Silverpeak, VMWare)
will only send sampled flows. Many Cisco devices were purchased for base
routing.... when the CPU cycles on the router are required to track and
maintain state of high volumes of flows, then HSRP, VLAN, and routing
processes may become flakey.
Cisco 10 GB interfaces are recommended to only sample 10% of the flows.
Cisco 40GB and higher interfaces are only recommended to sample 1% of the
flows.
Soooo... it depends both on the flow generation, and the flow collection,
how many / how deep you are looking to review in the flows. From there,
you can let the vendors know how many flows you want to review. Some
vendors will self eliminate, when high flow volumes are required.
We have a Cascade deployment we are building as a POC. The Riverbed gear
has been delivered. We are pushing to see how many flows we can generate
on the Cisco 10gb gear (with reasonable performance of routing, HSRP, and
spanning tree), while collecting on the Cascade. From there we will review
Juniper routers, F5 load balancers, and Silverpeak WAN optimizers.
The end goal is to find all gear that a flow traverses, and identify if
there are any anomalies in the path.
We use the Riverbed ARX, App Sensor, and Dashboards. We are looking to tie
together these tools in the dashboards with the Cascade product line. If
we can scale it properly, our developers and ops teams will be very happy.
I should know more in the next 3-6 months, regarding the integration, and
scaling of NetFlow in our environment.
Best of luck to you,
-Ted
Phil,
Sounds like you're already planning to check out Fluke Networks Visual TruView. If you want a more complete listing of the other products in the space you can view the full Gartner NPM-D Magic Quadrant report, as well as EMA's AANPM Radar Report on our website. That will give you an overview of most of the other solutions in this market. You can view the full reports at www.flukenetworks.com and www.flukenetworks.com
Definitely look at Compuware's aaNPM Data Centre Real User Monitoring (DCRUM). There are a number of benefits when you monitor on the wire (either by TAP or SPAN) rather than polling devices for stats.
In my experiences, any reputable solution for AANPM needs three comprehensive capabilities:
1. "All-In". Too many solutions provide a base application that offers a subset of capabilities (bandwidth monitoring of networking infrastructure, as an example) and upgrade modules that offer the "rounded out" full solution. Do you want performance monitoring at the application level? There is a module for that. How about monitoring your virtual environment? Sure, we can sell you a module for that. This approach gets both complex and expensive and quite often results in environments having gap-outs in their coverage either due to budget constraints or departmental silo approaches.
2. Ease of use. Monitoring tools are supposed to make your IT job easier...not create more mundane work for an already taxed staff. Make sure that the solution is easy to install and easy to maintain.
3. Affordable, with flexibility and scale. Monitoring solutions should not only be attainable for the largest enterprises, but also to smaller entities. Whether monitoring 100 devices or applications or 100,000, the solution should be equally beneficial to all environments.
If you agree that these three attributes are important to you as part of your evaluation, I would strongly recommend a review of the German engineered, Paessler Router Traffic Grapher, AKA as PRTG.
You can try WhatsUpGold as Network, Application, & Server Monitoring as solution, see this link: www.whatsupgold.com
WhatsUpGold is an award-winning IT management solutions including network, server and application performance monitoring software.
You can have a look at WhatsUp Gold Evaluation (it's a recorded webinar) info.whatsupgold.com so that you can get an idea about the solution.
Any other information needed, please do not hesitate to let me know.
Hello,
NetScout, Cisco, Fluke Networks, and Network Instruments all make known
network monitoring tools which all comparable. I've worked with Riverbed
in the past with one of my customers. We were installing our VOIP system
and had a few integration items to address during implementation.
Support seemed very good and very willing to work with other vendors.
Thanks.