No more typing reviews! Try our Samantha, our new voice AI agent.

Huawei eSight vs InfoScale comparison

Why PeerSpot?
 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Huawei eSight
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
56th
Average Rating
7.4
Reviews Sentiment
6.9
Number of Reviews
10
Ranking in other categories
Network Management Applications (16th)
InfoScale
Ranking in IT Infrastructure Monitoring
25th
Average Rating
8.6
Reviews Sentiment
6.1
Number of Reviews
9
Ranking in other categories
Data Loss Prevention (DLP) (19th), High Availability Clustering (1st), Disaster Recovery (DR) Software (13th), Data Storage for Kubernetes (2nd), Autonomous Operational Resilience (4th)
 

Mindshare comparison

As of October 2026, in the IT Infrastructure Monitoring category, the mindshare of Huawei eSight is 0.9%, up from 0.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of InfoScale is 0.1%. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
IT Infrastructure Monitoring Mindshare Distribution
ProductMindshare (%)
InfoScale0.1%
Huawei eSight0.9%
Other99.0%
IT Infrastructure Monitoring
 

Featured Reviews

Gary Strydom - PeerSpot reviewer
Desktop Analyst at Transnet
Used to monitor devices and provides the hardware alarms feature
Huawei eSight has helped me overcome many monitoring aspects of the hardware. From a single view, I can monitor all the hardware. Instead of logging on to each piece of hardware and monitoring it individually, I can monitor them from one single point. I would recommend the solution to other users because it provides a single point of view of the hardware. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.
TJ
Site Reliability Engineer (Certified) at Kyndryl India
Automated recovery has minimized downtime and supports seamless multi‑datacenter failover
Beyond pricing, there are areas where I would like to see InfoScale improved or enhanced. Veritas offers three management approaches. The first, which Veritas currently recommends, is Veritas Operation Manager. The second is the Cluster Manager Java Console graphical interface. The Cluster Manager Java Console has not been revised since version 6.1 or 6.2. This tool was critical for me, particularly valuable when managing small cluster footprints of 20 to 30 server nodes. I relied heavily on this tool, but Veritas has moved away from it in favor of Operation Manager. I recommend Veritas continue evolving this tool rather than discarding it. The third approach is the command line, suitable for individuals with extensive Veritas expertise and experience, but command line use in live environments consumed excessive time, leading me to prefer the graphical interface. Apart from pricing, I have not discovered disadvantages. The product is excellent. My concern is Veritas discarding the Cluster Manager Java Console in favor of Veritas Operation Manager. Setting up Operation Manager requires time and a dedicated server that runs continuously. I had to create a single server just for Veritas Operation Manager. While this works well for larger environments with hundreds of clusters, it is less useful for smaller deployments. I still recommend Veritas reconsider this application and evolve it by incorporating new features from Veritas Operation Manager. Adding these new features to the Java console would be beneficial because that tool runs on my laptop without consuming environment resources, and I can connect directly to clusters from my laptop. I am not opposing Veritas Operation Manager, which is excellent and resembles hardware management consoles for power machines, but smaller tools that previously performed these tasks should remain as options to provide clients with greater ease. From a features and functionality perspective, I do not find missing features in InfoScale at this moment. However, I am not actively using Veritas, managing only legacy machines on older hardware. I am upgrading operating systems but not Veritas due to contract expiration and end-of-life status. The contract is not being renewed because the customer wants to move away. Since I have not logged into VCS since 2021 and transferred responsibilities to another team, I am unaware of features arriving in version 8 or beyond and cannot comment specifically on recent Veritas introductions.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"Huawei eSight provides businesses with monitoring capabilities of network devices across your network."
"We can scale the solution."
"We use this solution to monitor our sales."
"Since we have a central monitoring system, we can proactively monitor those devices, easily capture any abnormalities before major downtime, and quickly address the issues before they become a bigger problem in the future."
"We have found the product to be stable and reliable."
"The most important features are alarm management and the visualization of the health of our network devices."
"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."
"InfoScale does that all by itself without any dependency on different solutions."
"From a recovery standpoint, InfoScale is excellent and easy to manage."
"In a live incident scenario, the data replication process occurs in real-time, and compared to other products, this data replication feature works effectively, ensuring data availability, and we can implement this scenario using Veritas Volume Replication (VVR), which is the most usable feature in InfoScale for data replication."
"InfoScale's ability to maintain data integrity and availability during a cyber event such as a ransomware attack is excellent."
"It's a stable solution."
"Over the last two years, we did not experience any application failover or receive alerts due to the immediate switchover mechanism in active-active mode that ensures no downtime, helping us significantly with confidence and trust in our organization."
"It offers High Availability for many applications, including Oracle and SAP environment."
"It integrates well with other solutions."
 

Cons

"The price is very expensive."
"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."
"It is not a very flexible product. We cannot change much from our side."
"The variety of license types should be made simpler as, at present, it is complex."
"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."
"Huawei eSight should work on the option to have the email notification working on Office 365 Exchange."
"The price could be less costly."
"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."
"While InfoScale is mainly used by enterprise-level customers, it does not inherently support many applications, which presents a scalability issue."
"Many customers can see the benefits of InfoScale, but they are usually not able to buy the products and solutions because of the licensing costs."
"Many customers can see the benefit of InfoScale, but they are usually not able to purchase the product because the license cost is very high."
"Based on my experience with support, I would rate them a nine, only because occasionally the first person I talk to does not know more than I do and it needs to be escalated to reach someone more knowledgeable."
"My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing indicates that pricing is a little higher and should be reduced since most companies cannot afford it."
"It could be more stable and more secure."
"It's very difficult to implement."
"The primary concern is licensing cost, as the customer is unwilling to invest further and has begun cost-cutting measures."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution’s pricing is reasonable."
"I would rate this solution a nine out of ten for pricing. The pricing depends on which features you use and can become expensive."
"Pricing depends on the competition. If your competitor is like Cisco, then Huawei is much more competitive when it comes to pricing."
"The pricing for Huawei eSight is reasonable, especially with the base license and incremental licenses for additional devices. However, the variety of license types can be a bit complex. We used to sell eSight but switched to another solution, so we're not actively trading it anymore."
"Its pricing is better than any other Huawei product. Some products are cheaper in Huawei, and some products are cheaper in Cisco. Cisco has more benefits and options than Huawei if you consider different network environments."
"The price is very expensive."
"Our clients pay for licensing on a yearly basis."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Financial Services Firm
17%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Construction Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Financial Services Firm
18%
Manufacturing Company
8%
Outsourcing Company
8%
Media Company
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business5
Midsize Enterprise5
Large Enterprise1
By reviewers
Company SizeCount
Small Business7
Midsize Enterprise4
Large Enterprise6
 

Questions from the Community

Ask a question
Earn 20 points
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Veritas InfoScale Availability?
My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing is that it is a bit expensive, but rather than that, because it is used in critical environments with no competitor, most of the customers go f...
What needs improvement with Veritas InfoScale Availability?
InfoScale can be improved if it added more robust reporting features; it has reporting, but it is very simple. If it created an integration with a reporting tool that makes it official, customers c...
What is your primary use case for Veritas InfoScale Availability?
My main use case for InfoScale is that we use it in many scenarios. In some scenarios, we use it for clustering for a product like Enterprise Vault, using InfoScale Enterprise, where we handle the ...
 

Also Known As

No data available
Veritas InfoScale Availability, Arctera InfoScale for Kubernetes
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Marina Bay, CITIC Pacific Mining
Wayne State University, Zenith Mart
Find out what your peers are saying about Huawei eSight vs. InfoScale and other solutions. Updated: September 2026.
915,341 professionals have used our research since 2012.