ManageEngine OpManager Reviews

My personal use case is for network management, traffic flow, am any kind of alerts. Anything you can think of, you can program through OpManager or anything on the network you can think of, you can program through OpManager. We run monthly and weekly reports and all of those are programmed and then in a week or a month, it's in your inbox. Your CIF log scan goes through it all.

You can put all of your work on there and they'll send you an email or send you a text. That functionality as a network engineer is the one I like the most. I do like the fact that we can schedule reports. That works too because that's a lot fewer spreadsheets that I have to create.

OpManager is slow but that just might be the server we have it on. I don't think that's the problem but I don't do the server. But it is slow. When you're interacting with it, it could be more nimble and could be faster.

The UI is fine, it's just a little sluggish. But once it's up and running, it's good.

I have been using OpManager for four years. 

We don't have problems with stability. 

It might be slow but it's stable. No problem there either. That's not something that should stop anybody from buying it. My preference would be to speed it up, but there's probably a reason why it's not as fast as I would like it.

I've only had to deal with support once or twice and I've never had a problem. My colleague handles it a little bit more than I do, and I've never heard him gripe about it.

I didn't set them up but from what I know about it, it's straightforward.

It's a good solution. I wasn't part of the decision or part of the team at the time that they chose it but it definitely does what we need it for. It has more functionality than what we use it for, so I think it's overall a good solution. The only gripe I have is like everybody else, I would want it to be faster. That's the only issue I have.

I would rate OpManager a nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for monitoring, managing our active directory and to deploy patch management.

The solution is easy to deploy. It's also easy to manage and monitor the environment. Instead of being reactive, it's proactive.

The support offered after deployment needs improvement.

The solution is a bit difficult to configure. There are quite a number of configurations and plugins that you must handle early in the process.

The solution should offer richer reporting and more dashboards.

I've been using the solution for three years.

Technical support isn't the best. We're in South Africa, and most of the support team is in the US or the UK.

We also use SolarWinds. We use many similar products, not just ManageEngine.

The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment takes less than two days. For maintenance, you need to have a proactive type of arrangement.

I handled the deployment myself.

You just have to pay for licensing; there aren't any costs over and above that.

We use the on-premises deployment model. We have about four people using the solution.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to monitor our servers.

The application monitoring is the solution's most valuable feature.

The licensing model is confusing. 

For example, when we add a storage device on the OpManager, we don't know how it is calculating those which are added into the server. It's unclear how is it calculating the licensing model for the storage portion. 

I've been using the solution for 1.5 years.

The solution is fairly stable. Only when you are opening another tab to see the live monitoring will you experience a bit of hanging. It will respond, so I am assuming the lag is because of the resources which are allocated for that particular server. 

The solution is scalable. You just need the correct licensing. You can get a license for features such as Hyper-V, VMware, etc. We've been satisfied with the level of scalability we've achieved.

I have not found any difficulty in using the app, so I don't know how the technical quality is on their support. We haven't opened a ticket with technical support yet, but we're unsure of the process and if we have to open a ticket at the support level or not. They could make their services and processes more clear for getting assistance when customers need it.

Our company has tried a variety of solutions but not in any significant manner.

The initial setup is straightforward. Deployment takes about half an hour. I had to do a lot of research, but once I realized how everything worked, it was very quick. You only need one person to handle deployment.

I handled the implementation myself.

Before choosing the solution, I did look at other solutions. Some had complicated setups or licensing models. This solution is very easy because the pricing was not that high and the set up wasn't complicated. It was very good for our environment.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for monitoring connectivity and server resource utilization among other things.

The solution's network device monitoring is the most valuable feature.

The solution offers very good integration capabilities.

The pricing of the solution is high. They should work to adjust the pricing model to see if they can help reduce costs.

They could add more support on devices and maybe make more versions of devices in order to offer better monitoring.

The solution is stable.

Technical support is very good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's easy to manage.

The solution is costly. SolarWinds, a competitor, is even more expensive than this, however. Still, they should reduce pricing to make it more affordable for a lot of clients.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

In terms of advice I'd give to others, I'd say they have to create proper maps and ensure proper connectivity. They have to map the switch ports properly so that they will know exactly which port is down and which devices will be affected. They also have to evaluate the utilization and properly set the thresholds, otherwise, they will be getting a lot of notifications.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

Our primary use case of this solution is for monitoring the hardware resources for the servers.

The most valuable feature is the monitoring alerts. The administrators are immediately notified and can do the required action immediately. This is the feature we value and use the most. 

The storage level monitoring needs improvement. It needs storage level monitoring on the server itself. That feature is lacking right now. I already communicated with them and they are saying that this will be in a future release. The developers are working on it. This feature is really lacking but apart from this, this product is really good.

It is stable. It's a very good and stable product. The only thing lacking is storage. 

We have around five users using this solution. 

Technical support is good. Not excellent but I can say it's good. We are satisfied. 

We have only used this solution of its kind. 

The initial setup is straightforward. It wasn't complex. 

We implemented with an integrator. They installed and configured all of the settings. 

It's a very good tool and I would definitely recommend it to someone considering it. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten because there is room for improvement and because it needs storage. 

We use this solution for monitoring our local network and servers. We have on on-premises deployment.

We wanted a solution to monitor our service, which is why we decided to go with OpManager. It helps us a lot for monitoring our servers in one console, instead of going to individual servers. 

The most valuable feature of this solution is the server monitoring tool.

The licensing for this solution is not straightforward and should be improved.

The dashboard is not that easy to manage for the layman. It requires some tricks, and if you don't know them then you cannot manage it.

If the storage is part of a device then I would like to be able to monitor it as a single device, rather than two separate devices.

In terms of stability, there is no problem.

It is easy to scale, but scalability depends on the number of licenses you buy. 

I have not dealt with technical support for this solution.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

I deployed this solution myself, which took perhaps half an hour.

The licensing costs depend on the number of devices and accounts that are being monitored by the solution. It is a little bit tricky. For example, if it is monitoring storage then it will count the number of devices that are there. If you exceed the number of devices then it will cost a lot.

I evaluated SolarWinds using the trial version, and I found this solution to be easier to deploy and easier to manage. It also requires less processing than SolarWinds.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This solution is being used by Saudi Customs, and there are different classifications of ports. We have land ports, airports, and dry ports. In total, we have almost forty-two remote sites with a semi-centralized data center. We have both on-premises and cloud-based deployments in a distributed system.

The most valuable feature is the network-related reporting. This solution generates daily reports for network statistics, such as router uptime and events. 

The dashboard has some limitations and should be more user-friendly. Other solutions, such as SolarWinds, have much better dashboards. This solution is difficult to use for non-technical users.

Having an option to call the help desk, like in other solutions, would be very useful for some problems. It would provide much more help for the end-user, or for those who are less technical.

This solution is not suitable for enterprise-sized deployments, as it sometimes hangs and needs to be restarted.

This solution has issues with connectivity from the client-side.

With respect to technical support, escalation through the levels has to be easier.

This solution is good for a smaller or medium-sized business. In an enterprise environment like ours, which is very big, the solution sometimes hangs and we need to restart. It may have to do with the configuration, I think it may be because of our large number of work stations and servers.

SolarWinds is more stable than this solution. OpManager seems to have more connectivity issues from the client-side.

Scaling this solution is easy. Sometimes, there is an issue where there is a conflict with licenses, but this is resolved with a call to technical support.

In terms of people using this solution, we have approximately twenty users in the data center, and one or two people for each port.

Technical support for this solution is fine. However, it is very hard to reach level one. Level two and three are ok, but they just give a general answer, such as switch something on or restart. Sometimes we need a technical person who can troubleshoot our problems quickly, which requires level one. It can take a lot of time to escalate through the levels. If you have a critical issue then it can be escalated to level one immediately.

Technical support has to be improved because for us to always start at level three, it is wasting our time.

Prior to this solution, we were using SolarWinds. It is a better product than the offering by ManageEngine, and I prefer it.

This product was recommended by our manager so we implemented a POC and found that it can mostly fulfill our requirements. We switched because we are running other ManageEngine products for things like Inventory Management, and the users are familiar with it.

During the initial setup, there are interviews by the Site Engineer. Once the setup is complete, our engineer will take care of the configuration and support. If there are any issues then we have to engage with the Site Engineer.

We handle the deployment on our own and ask for help if we need it.

We are using another product from the same vendor that's called Device Control. This product is for working on remote sites, and it is necessary because OpManager cannot fulfill our requirements. In Device Control you have the ability to troubleshoot, remote control, and you have inventory management.

For anybody who is researching this type of solution, I would suggest doing a POC to see if this solution will satisfy your goals and requirements in your environment. This will help you with your selection.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for analysis and network cables.

The solution's most valuable feature is its ability to reach most of our network devices and get the most from them.

The pricing could be improved.

The solution should offer more options and themes.

The solution is very stable.

The solution has very good potential for scalability. It's easy. We have about 300 people on the solution right now. We may increase usage in the future, but it depends on if our needs grow or not.

Technical support has been very good so far. We're satisfied with them.

The initial setup is a bit complicated. It needs a technician who is very aware of the flow and how to officially set up the flow chart, etc.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten.