Dell CloudIQ vs Zabbix comparison

"Fewer vulnerabilities have been observed in the four years we have used the solution."

"Has really nice roll-up dashboards."

"Mobile application is the most valuable feature for us. We can monitor all the storages on our phones. It's really good."

"Some of the most valuable features of CloudIQ include its health status alerts, which allow you to see quickly if there is something that needs immediate attention, preventing the need to check each system individually."

"I rate CloudIQ a ten out of ten."

"CloudIQ allows us to monitor our servers centrally, and we can receive notifications in case of issues, like a potential hard drive failure."

"The dashboard is clear and user-friendly."

"The dashboard is clear and user-friendly."

"The most valuable feature is the protocol to manage anything."

"SNMP monitoring, source discovery, and alert triggering are most valuable."

"We detect problems before the customer does and before it actually happens using the predictive functions in Zabbix."

"The solution is quite mature and very stable."

"Zabbix helps to save time."

"The performance and bandwidth are valuable features."

"In terms of customization and integration, we have more flexibility. We can automate configurations, define deletion rules, and customize based on the needs. The client interface allows for further configuration, making it quite comprehensive."

"The most valuable feature is monitoring."

"In terms of improvement, they should enhance the product range."

"Supporting legacy systems is an area that can be improved."

"Getting through support has become a difficult thing. Dell's support has degraded since they took over EMC. It's a bit difficult to use."

"PowerScale is the only file system offered and that is limiting."

"The reporting capabilities of this solution could be improved."

"There is a need for improvement in predictive maintenance, which I assume is somewhat AI-driven."

"If you have a heterogeneous environment, there might be some limitations in coverage since CloudIQ is primarily designed for Dell-based infrastructures."

"The main limitation of CloudIQ is that it is intended to be used exclusively with Dell hardware."

"Zabbix isn't a great tool for cloud-specific monitoring - its connection to public clouds needs to be improved. Other areas for improvement would be the lack of dashboards and integrations."

"Documentation terminology could be improved."

"I have experienced stability issues approximately five or ten times."

"One of the things we don't like is that Zabbix has a license structure with a price that is high compared to the competition. It's very high, for example, compared to something like Microsoft Teams."

"The only improvement I would suggest, revolves around its AI and ML capabilities."

"Zabbix does not draw automatic mapping of the network, this is something they should add in the future. There is a lot of effort that is involved in tailoring some of the settings which could be made easier."

"Its UI needs to be improved a little bit more so that an end-user is also able to handle it. I can handle it, but others should also be able to handle it in a better way. It becomes complex when we are growing and need to add proxies. We need more scalability features and documentation for different use cases. A lot of articles are available, but they need to be in proper documentation. For example, when you have thousands of servers that have to be monitored in different regions of the world, there should be some kind of documentation to describe how you can create proxies and add them. Sometimes, when you are using the database, it can get overloaded. When the network is growing, the number of transactions becomes very high, and the database gets overloaded. There should be information about how to reduce the load on the MySQL database, which is what Zabbix is using. The market is growing a lot, and it should be enhanced for a lot more things. We are currently bringing enhancements at our end for different use cases. For example, when dockerization is going on, how can we check the logs inside the Dockers. We should also be able to monitor and check the number of logins and add features such as SSO login and two-factor authentication as a protocol. These are the security features and concerns that we have to deal with. Currently, we are developing modules to add features to Zabbix, but they should also work on these features."

"The product delivers false positives during reporting because of flapping. Other reasonably priced alternatives may have better performance."

"I believe it is a free product because we don't pay for it."

"The solution is more expensive than NetApp which offers file systems in various price ranges."

"The solution is open source so is free."

"Zabbix is open-source so if one wishes to implement it in-house, they must have qualified professionals to set up and optimize databases, Linux/Unix OS, PHP, Apache, and depending on what is monitored, a full-stack network and systems administrator may be needed."

"Its licensing is fair. It seems to be much cheaper than others."

"It is open source. If you want to have a subscription or official support, you can pay for it. They have different plans, which are not that expensive. The plans are based on per monitoring server, not per monitored equipment. So, it is not at all expensive, and you can also live without the support if you want a cheaper option."

"This is an open-source solution that can be used free of charge."

"If you have 20,000 hosts, the support costs around €95,000 for a year."

"The tool's licensing costs are yearly."

"There are no licenses."