We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and Infraon IMS based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring."I can deploy something in my 50-odd servers all in one go, in parallel, whereas if I was to do that individually, it could be a nightmare."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"What I like most about Cisco UCS Manager is the ease of administration. It also allows the central management of maintenance, installation, and configuration activities."
"The interface is ergonomic and native. We can use UCS Manager to do all the configurations for the servers, including storage, networking, and all the other components we need inside the fabric. It's simple and flexible."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"We use the solution to automatically trigger processes to help us resolve issues. The whole IT process has been automated, such as trying to map all the users and the escalation process. So, if any issue happens, we get an SMS and WhatsApp of the report. If there is a critical issue this has to be sorted out, like the entire data center being down, then there is an alarm."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"It is a stable product. After the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much. All systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"The role-based dashboards provide data points and charts and topology diagrams in a single window. It's like a spider web, where the application, connectivity, and everything is defined for each user of those applications."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"The solution's pricing is high and could be reduced."
"I found it a bit of a challenge to get training on UCSM. I've been trying to get that for some time now. I feel like I have to figure it out a lot of things myself. For years I've to log calls with support whenever I've got challenges that I cannot resolve. If I had some training or more manuals, I'd be better able to handle more things on my own."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"Cisco UCS Manager is not a scalable solution because once you have 160 blades, it cannot be expanded more."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"I would like to see an integrated view of Infraon IMS and Infraon Desk. It would be very helpful if that were integrated into the solution."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets. There are GDPR and other requirements that might require country-specific sensitive information to be filtered as well as other things that need to be taken care of. Normally, if we need to do any compliance, like ISO27000 compliance, they don't have such a report within their system. This kind of report is missing from their SaaS. That is one of the reasons that we have gone to the on-prem version, where I am assured that my data is secure."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while Infraon IMS is ranked 63rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while Infraon IMS is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Used to manage servers, monitor or manage firmware upgrades, and push policies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Infraon IMS writes "Provides data accuracy for availability and policy harmonization". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Datadog, whereas Infraon IMS is most compared with Zabbix, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Equinix IBX SmartView.
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.