We performed a comparison between Checkmk and Huawei eSight based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup of Checkmk was easy...It is a very stable solution."
"We can monitor multiple sites using the product."
"I really like the auto-discovery feature."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it has a lot of different pieces, and they all work together...It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable features of Checkmk are its resource monitoring, infra monitoring, and log factor configuration."
"It's versatile, scalable, and easier to use compared to other solutions like Nagios and OMD."
"The most important features are alarm management and the visualization of the health of our network devices."
"We can scale the solution."
"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."
"The product is stable."
"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."
"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."
"In Checkmk, the documentation can probably be improved a bit more."
"If an alert is generated for a specific pattern in the log, and if Checkmk catches that log, it will stay there even after the alert is resolved."
"The initial setup is a bit complex."
"Sometimes we receive alerts, and it can become annoying when you acknowledge an alert. It is very clunky when you acknowledge the alert. The process is not very intuitive, and there are instances where it feels a bit cumbersome to acknowledge an alert."
"I think that the integration and the exporting of the data collected are areas where Checkmk lacks but should try to improve the most."
"It is easy for tech-savvy people, but newcomers might find it intimidating."
"This solution could be improved by offering monitoring for all devices and not only Huawei devices."
"Something that could be improved is the lack of integration with Cisco switches. In the next release, I would like to see better reporting."
"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."
"It is not a very flexible product."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The price could be less costly."
Checkmk is ranked 20th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 6 reviews while Huawei eSight is ranked 53rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 8 reviews. Checkmk is rated 8.6, while Huawei eSight is rated 6.8. The top reviewer of Checkmk writes "A reasonably priced tool for system and application monitoring". 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". Checkmk is most compared with Zabbix, Icinga, Netdata, Centreon and Observium, whereas Huawei eSight is most compared with Cisco DNA Center, Zabbix, Cisco Prime, PRTG Network Monitor and SolarWinds NPM. See our Checkmk vs. Huawei eSight report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.
