We performed a comparison between CA Unified Communications Monitor and Nmap based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"We use the solution to meet the needs of the customer."
"Good end-to-end monitoring"
"The most important function, according to me, is the capability to use some arguments in the scanning. The solution's capability to go figure and do a deep dive, discovering information on specific aspects."
"It enables us to delve deeper and identify the services and open ports on the system and visualize this information on a dashboard automatically."
"It helps us secure the network infrastructure."
"It is a very user-friendly product."
"From a functionality standpoint, it's robust and straightforward to comprehend."
"The most valuable feature of the solution for security audits stems from the fact that it serves as a powerful tool with the ability to scan a large number of ports."
"The real-time reporting feature of Nmap is particularly valuable. It generates detailed reports on the source and destination IP addresses, the protocols used, and the types of traffic."
"The scanning procedure includes UDP ports which sets it apart from competitors."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The solution should have automatic baseline detection."
"All the features and functions of the solution can be improved."
"There could be a specific option to check non-pingable endpoints for the product."
"It takes a bit of time to get familiar with the solution and its options."
"Since I started using Nmap, it has been completely based on the command prompt and I think it would help other users if they implemented a decent GUI as well."
"The solution's initial setup could be better."
"There is room for improvement in the design, the GUI. It looks a bit odd. Maybe Nmap should improve it or add more widgets to make it more attractive, but the basic functionality is good and provides what we need."
"Nmap needs to improve its scanning speed."
"The challenge often lies in finding suitable courses and professional resources."
"One of the drawbacks of the standard Nmap utility is that it does not come with a graphical user interface, unlike a number of other open-source alternatives such as Zenmap."
Earn 20 points
CA Unified Communications Monitor is ranked 95th in Network Monitoring Software while Nmap is ranked 18th in Network Monitoring Software with 20 reviews. CA Unified Communications Monitor is rated 6.6, while Nmap is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of CA Unified Communications Monitor writes "Good end-to-end voice quality monitoring and offers valuable features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nmap writes " Improves network monitoring and offers insights into traffic, including VPNs". CA Unified Communications Monitor is most compared with , whereas Nmap is most compared with Azure Network Watcher, SolarWinds NPM, SolarWinds NetFlow Traffic Analyzer, Domotz and Zabbix. See our CA Unified Communications Monitor vs. Nmap report.
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.
