DX Spectrum Reviews

The most valuable feature is it’s ability to monitor our network. We have a fairly sizable network with over 4000 nodes. Ultimately, at a hospital, network integrity is a patient care issue, so you want to make sure that the network is up as close to 100% as possible, 24/7 365. Hospitals don't close, so it needs to support that.

Its ability to alert us on network issues before they become critical is a great benefit. For example, say one of the power supplies on a device that has more than one goes down. Spectrum alerts us so we're aware of it, we can go and take care of the issue. If there are temperature issues, like if closets are hot, or something happens in the data closet, we are forewarned that there could be an issue happening. We can go and address it before anything happens.

The latest release I think is 10.2, and that may still be in beta right now, but we're on the newest version of the software. I don't necessarily know if there's anything in the latest release that has helped us, because we've been using Spectrum for about 5 years now. All the new releases do have their own advantages. I just don't know if we're leveraging any of those in relation to the latest release.

The web-based client that Spectrum has needs to be able to use multiple landscapes and multiple alarm filters. Right now, if you choose a landscape and then choose an alarm filter, you can have one or the other, but you can't pair them, which is a major problem because we have more than one landscape. That's one example.

Another example would be to have the ability to leverage Spectrum into Performance Center regarding topology maps. In Performance Center, we cannot see a topology map with drawn out nodes or take a picture from Spectrum and put it into Performance Center to see the nodes and links between the nodes. That would be something that we would like to see. At a recent conference, we spoke to CA about that; you never know. I hear the latest version fixes this, but I have yet to see it. If they can give me that in the web-based client, I would give Spectrum a 10/10. Then my team would be able to use it. Right now, with Java OneClick, it's a problem, because people would like to be able to launch it.

I would also really like to see a mobile Spectrum app. I know they have one, but it's really not very good. I don't know how much money and time they put into building it, but that would be great. If they had mobile, I have on my phone what they have. But it's really not very good. Again, if I could get the same view from my phone that I get from OneClick that would be awesome.

Spectrum itself is stable. I think some of the other applications like the reporting solution tends to be a little bit of a problem for a manager. Whenever we apply patches and upgrades, it basically breaks reporting and we have to rebuild our reports. I have a whole bunch of automated reports that go out, and every time there's some type of an upgrade we have to rebuild those supports from scratch.

Spectrum is very scalable. We presently have three landscapes and a number of alarm filters running on Spectrum. We are probably a mid-range sized customer. There are some customers that have 50,000 nodes on the network.

We have an MSO with CA, so they're constantly engaged with us all the time. They do a very good job. They support us with requirements that we are not really geared for and can't really support, so we'll ask them, "Hey, can you do this for us, and get this result?" We have that across all of the CA applications that we use.

I was not involved with the original setup at this particular company. I was involved with the initial setup at a prior company I was at.

When I started at the hospital, they already had it. I've been involved in building the Spectrum and Performance Center from the beginning, because when I started there they weren't really leveraging it at all.

It's been somewhat complex. More complex than I think it should have been, but I think that was more due to the original implementation being done by a third party. It wasn't done by CA and I think that was a problem. I think there was a lot of disconnect between what was actually being done and what was said was being done, and it wasn't very transparent, because the people that were overseeing it didn't really understand it. They were given a whole bunch of smoke and mirrors.

I would say that Spectrum is a great network monitoring tool, and it has a lot of features that most people probably don't even use. They just use it kind of like an up-down tool, but there's a lot more to it than that. I would say, if it was something that they were thinking about implementing into their environment, they should get somebody that knows the product well to explain everything and make sure that it's implemented correctly the first time.

As a bank, we use CA Spectrum to manage about 400 ATMs and 300 self-service terminals. We monitor this equipment network for alarms and other events. With Spectrum, we can determine how well the equipment is working and what services are available. Many of the issues are related to printing or paper supply.

Spectrum has given us the agility to solve problems faster. We are able to search our infrastructure so that we can isolate the problem and solve it fast. The first thing customers see when they enter the bank lobby is the ATM, so it's important that they be working properly.

The greatest benefit from the most recent release has come from redesigned dashboards. They make it easier for our technicians to discover faults and configure alarms that describe the problem in a clear manner. This allows us to go deeper into the zone or the equipment and isolate the problem. That is a real benefit for us.

I would like to see Spectrum dashboards more oriented in users necessities with an UX point of view. Also, I would like to see a more proactive approach to help managers to predict issues. Today with Spectrum we work in a reactive way where we notice problems after they occur. I would like Spectrum allowing us to prevent problems before they affect our Infrastructure.

We have been using Spectrum for six years.

At first, Spectrum was really difficult to configure properly. Today we are in a mature stage and the stability is really good. I think that the last version was more stable.

Spectrum is able to scale really well. Whenever we add equipment, such as when we open new branches or we replace old equipment with newer technology, we have no problem with scalability.

We work with a CA parner in Argentina called Netnix that helps us with first level support. They help us with the application on a day-to-day basis.

For many years, we used Navios to monitoring our infrastructure. Then, when we started to work with Spectrum, we had some cultural difficulties trying to get used to a new tool and getting the technical people to use it. For a while, we were running Spectrum and Navios at the same time. Today, we only use Spectrum with the ATMs and self-service terminals. There is also a cultural transformation in relation to the digital transformation, so we are working on moving to UIM.

I was not involved in the initial setup. Six years ago, when we first implemented Spectrum, I was in another role. Now, I'm responsible for the IT budget.

Mainly, we work with IBM and CA. They are our two main vendors. The most important criteria in selecting a vendor is the level of integration between the different tools. We work with several CA tools, such as SOI, UIM and APM to give us a total view of our infrastructure.

I think that the applications are great. The most important factor is who is going to be the partner helping you to implement this solution. Choose a good, trustworthy partner. I think that CA Spectrum is a really good tool.

What I like about the latest that they came out with is that 10.2 looks like it's going to be better, and they added a web console. I like the HTML5 fact of it, because it's a lot easier for me to get to my admins and other elements like that so they can look at their own stuff without having to sift through a bunch of stuff. I really like the web console addition, and from what I see from the 10.2, the whole thing is going to be HTML5. I really think that that's going to be real beneficial as far as me getting people convinced to use it and to actually look at it, instead of coming to me all the time for help.

It helped, basically, because we are working on root cause analysis. If we were to have outages, we really didn't know what the problem was, we just knew we had a server down. With Spectrum, we can do a root cause analysis by building topologies and we can actually tell you what port went bad on what device. Instead of just knowing that the device went down, we can know why it went down and exactly what happened.

If 10.2 goes completely to HTML5, I think that's going to be awesome. Just give everybody a website and tell them to log in and it'll be single-sign-on login, too, so they don't even have to remember another password. There is value in that alone, just trying to get people to log in and use it themselves, see it, and monitor it. They can monitor their own stuff and if something is wrong, I can do the tweaking, but at least they could see what's going on. I don't have to sit there and look at a dashboard and call everybody up and say, "Hey, your server's got an alert" because they don't want to mess with the Java console. They don't want to install whatever they have to, in order to do it themselves. I don't know, I call it laziness, but they're busy too. If it could fix it itself, that would be great! I think the way they're headed now with the roadmap and the visions that I saw. I really think that any improvements that they're going to make will be made in this next release. Basically, what I'm seeing right now, I think the improvements are happening..

We haven't really had any stability issues with it, now that they've actually did some more upgrades. The biggest problem we had with it at the beginning was just the Java console. You had to have an older version of Java and then you had to go in and actually set the library up in the Java for another one. You had to make a lot of changes and a lot of people didn't want to go through that. That is the reason why I really like the web console on it now because you can get away with not having to install the Java console. If you have to add three more steps to a process, they just don't want to use it.

I have used technical support and they are very good. I've never had a problem. Usually I'll open up a case and I'll hear something back from them the same day. They're very knowledgeable with their products and very helpful, too. If I just don't have time to research something and I need it fixed, I just tell them "I need this fixed" and I never have an issue. They take care of it. They'll even connect remotely and do it themselves sometimes.

Be patient. In its current state, I would have a representative from whoever your partner is help you with it. From what I can see, when we implemented UI, it took 2 weeks of on-site representation from our partner to help get it up and running. I think it's something that it would be less painful if you did have somebody that knew what they were doing, one of your partners or something, come and help you install it and get it installed. Then after that, start running with it. Do not do it by yourself.

I choose a vendor based on their knowledge of the product. I need them to be able to tell me what I need to know and where I can go to get information. Don't try to sell me something and then tell me you don't know how to use it. I've had that happen with some stuff. For example, by saying something like, "I'm new at this". I need the knowledge. That's what I want from you to help me to succeed, because we pay good money for this stuff. We have MSOs and everything we pay for yearly, and I really do use it. I don't have time to sit there and always research something and read something, so if I call you with an issue, I really hope you know what I'm talking about and you can help me fix it.

The most valuable feature is that after setup, using it is very straightforward. Configuration was very simple, and the technical support was also good.

The greatest benefit is the kind of alerts that we get. We can do root cause analysis to correlate events. Instead of getting 100 emails when the core is down we get an alert.

I would say integration between performance monitoring and CA Spectrum, as well as improved graphing capabilities.

We have not had any issues with stability.

I think the scalability is good. Right now, we have about 1,000 devices. The good part about Spectrum is that you don't have to worry when you want to expand.

Technical support is very good.

Previously, we were using open-source solutions.

With the help of the support and the documentation, setup was straightforward.

We also evaluated SolarWinds before going with CA Spectrum.

Stability and support are important to us. We want to have the confidence that the vendor is investing in their product.

Some of the most valuable features are:

• The ability to have a topographical map of our infrastructure
• Downstream suppression
• The ability to capture SNMP traps from non-network devices

It allows us to resolve issues faster when they occur in our environment. We're able to easily detect and alert when something goes down almost right away. We can be more proactive, and we're trying to reduce the number of incidents that our users experience. The graphical user interface has improved, so it makes it easier for our technical team to use it. It is a little easier than Spectrum was five years ago.

I would like to see a better, more simple web interface. Getting rid of the Java requirements would be awesome. We have a lot of different applications that use Java. Sometimes there are conflicts. For example, we have some web based applications that are proprietary to our company, which use a different version of Java than Spectrum, and this creates a conflict.

The Java requirement to run the console causes issues in some cases. It is possible to update the JAVA_HOME path, but requires knowledge of client operating systems. Having an HTML interface which does not require Java would be ideal.

Out of all of the CA products that we use, I would say this is the most stable. We very rarely have issues with it, which is great because it is monitoring almost 10,000 devices for us.

We've had no issues with any sort of scalability. We grow through mergers and acquisitions, so the ability to just roll out another server and have fault tolerant servers is great.

My team uses technical support and it's been great for this product.

We were using SolarWinds previously and it just did not offer a lot of the features that CA Spectrum does. CA worked really hard to create a strategic partnership with us which is very important. Being a large company, we have a wide range of products that we use from various different vendors and we need that support. We chose CA over IBM, and also SolarWinds. So again, the scalability of the product, the ease of implementation, and the account team was way easier to work with than any of the other vendors.

Spectrum installation was pretty straightforward. We had our primary servers acting as our fault tolerant servers. We were able to import a lot of our information from our old tool, which made it a lot easier to get up and running quickly.

Take into account more than just features. Look at the way that the organization provides support, the way the vendor provides support, and also if they're willing to work with you for the long term on adaptation within your company.

We consolidated multiple enterprise monitoring tools into a single toolset (using UIM and Spectrum integrated) that provides a vision of services, topologies, network configuration backup, network configuration scripts to configure devices in groups, MPLS vision, VPN vision, global collections to give a vision of branches, and ability to group network devices by priority.

Besides the technical benefits described, CA UIM and CA Spectrum were the key factors in increasing the SLA from the IT environment to 99.99%, from the 99.5% achieved without CA solutions. This achievement completely changed the way how LoBs see and recognize IT as their partners, avoiding the blame game and finger-pointing. After improving the SLA metrics, the next step was to get closer to the LoBs and provide relevant dashboards, punting together business views and emphasizing how it is related to IT, and vice versa.

After several weeks, this partnership and closer communication between IT and LoBs resulted in some dependency of LoB on UIM dashboards (i.e., every hour executive and tactical dashboards are sent to the senior executives). It is impressive how important it is to be connected with LoBs using simple, visual and intuitive dashboards that remove the roadblocks between IT and the entire organization.

• Integrations with other CA products 
• A better way to create reports

I have used it for eight years.

I’m a CA beta tester and found all issues that need to be solved in this program. I have no stability issues in my production environment.

I did not previously use a different solution.

This is a very stable product. It helps us to be proactive and prevents the company from losing money and business, by monitoring the entire network (data and voice) of the company (head office and branches) in real time, showing exactly where errors occur.

With CA Spectrum Southbound Gateway, it is possible to receive alarm data and turn it into events. With events, it is possible to correlate ICs, other events and shape any function to its will.

The southbound gateway can receive data from third party sources, other monitoring products, like SCOM from Microsoft, using the Southbound Gateway you can centralize all Management in one view, you receive SNMP data from other tools and turns in events, events in CA Spectrum turns in to Alarms, QOS or reports.

With CA Spectrum, we are now able to monitor more proactively network assets, reduce the total downtime of these and prevent money from being lost for device stoppages. The tool also gave us an event integrator for all other solutions, including non-CA solutions, forming a consolidated view of all information sent. From customized polices, we can standardize device nomenclature, facilitating the opening of external tickets and improve tracking them.

The EventDisp Logic (Code) is too complex.

I have used it for one year.

I have not encountered any deployment issues.

I have not encountered any stability issues.

I have not encountered any scalability issues.

Customer service is excellent.

Technical support is an expert team.

I previously used Nagios and Zabbix, but CA Spectrum is more efficient.

Initial setup is easy, but configuration properties and EventDisp is quite complex.

A vendor team implemented it, but I participated.

CA Spectrum have a good model of licensing; the prices are based on types of models. If you understand the event processing code (Southbound Gateway), you will reduce the licensing price by more than 50%.

CA Spectrum is a powerful product for monitoring network ICs; if you master the EventDisp logic and the Southbound Gateway Toolkit everything, becomes easier.

It is important to remember that with the size of product, some caution should be taken.

• Works excellent for heterogeneous networks (lots of different vendors)
• Error correlation
• Root-cause analysis
• Service intelligence
• Lots of add-on products for Spectrum, e.g., VMware integration
• Local extensions/developments for special needs, e.g., new vendor xyz

With the object-oriented design of Spectrum, from its very first version, we had very important issues, such as fault isolation and root-cause analysis implemented by default!! Which means that we had through all these years very precise fault indications on where to look for the error and were not overwhelmed by long lists of alarm, which were only effects of the real fault.

So we then concentrated on building a virtual picture of the complete real IT infrastructure inside Spectrum. This includes today a very wide range of devices, which are modelled inside Spectrum and interconnected in the correct hierarchy as in the real environment. And, as the big buzzword today is IoT, this means for us as a service provider to our university users to deal with MoT = Monitoring of Things!!

The “new” things include devices such as coffee machines, fridges, temperature sensors, worktime badge systems, door opening scanners, house automation systems (for light, sun blinds, climate, etc.), smoke and fire detectors, etc. This list increases every year with new “things” popping up on our network radar!

Of course, the real IT devices like routers, switches, firewalls, servers, storage devices, WiFi access points, IP phones, and, importantly, printers, form the base of the big “virtual” Spectrum picture.

And last but not least, Spectrum by design can be expanded in its function by a series of add-ons, such as VMware integration, which reads out automatically the virtual servers in the vCenter and models all VM’s inside Spectrum in the corresponding physical servers. Another example of an add-on is the integration of a performance probe with scenarios that run periodically (i.e., log in to a webmail portal, check for the existance of a message xyz, lookup the calendar, etc.) and map those scenarios to objects within Spectrum, which can be handled like devices, so you can put thresholds on them and get alarmed when violated!

Thanks to Spectrum, we are able to monitor (and send out alarms for) our whole IT infrastructure 7/24 without having more than a minimal number of technical persons.

• Reporting
• Full web-based topology view
• Path view

I have used it since fall 1990. We’re a simple - but extremely long-term customer.

I only encountered stability issues in very rare situations; mainly when we used our own extensions for private management modules.

I have not encountered any scalability issues so far!

Technical support is excellent - 9.5 on a scale 0-10 - but this also includes support from the local Spectrum partner here in Switzerland.

I did not previously use a different solution. At the time (fall 1990), there were only very few products available, where just two or three of them had a graphical visualization.

Initial setup was completely straightforward, as the product already included a discovery and an auto-connect function.

Start small and include as much of your IT infrastructure as possible, so that at the end you have a picture of the “big” total.