Kiteworks vs SolarWinds Serv-U File Transfer Protocol Server comparison

"We can see when people are sending things. We can definitely see who is sending to whom. From the administrative logs, we can see who is sending to an outside entity, and those logs are retained for quite a while."

"The best part of this solution is that we can generate multiple reports about how the data is transferred and about user information or IP."

"I can identify from which region our users are uploading or downloading files."

"We could see whether the customer with whom we shared a file had downloaded it, which was not available with GitHub."

"The solution can be used remotely; it's easy to upload and share files."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to allow end-users to manage their own information and data with minimal administration. That's the best feature from my perspective."

"Scalability is impressive."

"The most valuable feature is the ability to send a large file of 30 GB in size and more. In Outlook and other email applications, you cannot send files that are larger than 20 MB. But with Kiteworks, 30 GB is transferable by default and, with the proper approval, a file of up to 100 GB can be sent. It makes file transfer very easy and smooth."

"We use SolarWinds Serv-U File Transfer Protocol Server for internal file transfer."

"File location could be improved."

"Perhaps there could be a notification to users about their bandwidth or network packet loss."

"There is no offboarding process for end-users in Kiteworks. It's a manual process. There is no automated syncing with LDAP and checking to see if the account is still active. It's a manual process to get people out of here, which isn't the best way."

"It could be more stable. In the next release, it would be better if it was more stable with improved performance."

"It would be nice if Kiteworks could provide a free version of the platform so that it could be used for a certain number of file transfers. We could be charged a fee if we exceeded the number of allotted file transfers."

"The one feature, which I have also requested directly to Kiteworks, is to have a scheduled upgrade function. Currently, one of my engineers logs in after hours for the upgrade. We're a hospital, and we're 24/7, but the primary users are seven to five. So, we log in the early evening just to push a button to tell it to do the update. It would be nice if that could be very easily scheduled."

"Kiteworks could benefit from enhancing the proposal knowledge base section, specifically regarding the type of work involved. Currently, the knowledge base seems insufficiently dedicated to this topic, making it challenging for new users to access the relevant administrative law. Improving the visual aids and providing clearer explanations could alleviate this issue."

"There are always issues when there are bugs or upgrades. The challenge with upgrading is getting more storage from the customer. Every time we have a new version, it requires additional storage. This means that the customer would need to procure more storage for their server, which they don't like because it means additional cost to them. So, I think my request would be that the version upgrades don't require any significant storage requirement."

"The solution’s technical support should be improved."

"The price of Kiteworks is reasonable."

"It is not really expensive. I mean, to me it's obviously expensive, but it's worth it."

"I believe it's a little costly, but given the faith that we put into it from a security perspective to maintain the integrity of our patient information that is being transferred through this system, that's a small price to pay. So, on the surface, it might look like a lot of money, but depending on the need for security, which is where we feel it shines, it's okay price-wise."

"They changed it midstream. We were being charged a certain flat rate for SFTP traffic. For whatever reason, at the beginning of the year, our pricing changed, and we are now being charged more for using a feature of the product than we were when we first bought it. That has been our experience with billing. It turned out to be more expensive than when we started with it."

"The license management is changing and confusing. If I could make one change to it, it would be better license management through the API."

"The solution is very expensive because we are buying with Malaysian Ringgit and it's sold in US dollars."

"The pricing of the solution is INR 3,00,000."