Statseeker Reviews

Our primary use of Statseeker is for our interface. In our data center, we are typically a Cisco shop. We can now look thirty days into the future based on past stats of trends or fashion. 

If we have 10 servers in the field office, we can jump up to twenty based on utilization. We have the evidence. It is a lot of manual work to create those reports, but a bit easier now.

Statseeker helps solve an asymmetrical routing issue we had before. We could see traffic going out of one interface, but not coming back in.

An operations guy made a change and told us it was good. We didn't check it, we had too much going on. When I clicked in and looked at the traffic, you could tell it wasn't right. I had to log in and correct them so. That is a pretty good example of basic metrical routing.

Statseeker is quick and very simple to use. We want to keep it like that. It has to be simple.

The solution has affected our workload with all our network admin teams. They don't use this tool as much as I probably would like them to use it for initial troubleshooting. 

Statseeker helps to quickly see if you have a spike or something going on. In the future, we need to get NetFlow in the tool so we can see what the IP is.

This solution hasn't affected our network availability. It's helped because we can see when things go down or when things come up. If we have a circuit maxed out, we can reroute the traffic, and do different things like that.

For a reduced cost, it is not possible because our network is so big and part interface. Maybe if we got a single router in the field office it would reduce the cost. 

It's probably not a model we are going to go with because we like to have dual connectivity, dual routers, and dual switches set up.

With Statseeker I'd like to see some flow, i.e. what's tuning-up the network. The trend I like is managing the traffic load by going to the cloud. 

Statseeker tells you routing-wise how things are working, in terms of transmit and receive. You shouldn't be transmitting more than you are receiving. It depends on the traffic, but it should just mix and match. 

With Statseeker, we caught a lot of issues. We have a lot of operational issues.

The stability of the solution is up and running. We had once had an issue a couple of years ago with upgrading the code. Resolved it within ten minutes.

It does scale well. You have to pay for your account, but I had no issues. We've used this tool for probably eight years, maybe ten. 

The scalability of the solution helped us to implement SDN. It's going to take probably until next year. We have too many other projects going on right now.

We have multiple data centers and multiple campus locations. We have dual wire carriers. We can see transmit coming in, receipt coming out. 

I have Statseeker set up for routing. I can see when the interface goes down. Then the traffic flow over onto the other router. It's nice to have that.

Statseeker tech support was bad around 2-3 years ago. I have had the new support for maybe 6 months to a year. I'll be upgrading the codes. I haven't rung customer support in a year or so.

For software and hardware, how we spend the money depends on demand and what we have going on. One year, we could have campus refresh, and if we have a little bit of change left over we'd spend it on software. We have had Statseeker as long as 8-9 years ago.

The initial setup was straightforward. We did discovery of how many devices go onto a monitor. It didn't take too long to do it.

We bought directly from in-house sales, the Australian guys.

We have sixteen to twenty-thousand interfaces at a minimum.

Statseeker reduces the complexity of your network monitoring. It is easy. You don't have to go in and show the guys how to log in and check this and that. They can just click whichever router is required for the interface. 

I would like a single pane of glass. It's not there. We have so many devices. We have a huge network. We go over fifty thousand nodes in the US, UK, Ireland, and Poland.

We use different tools. Statseeker is one of them. Not all of them offer a single pane of glass for administration. You have to click in, dive in, and dig into the ways.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I'd rate Statseeker with a 9 based on what I have seen there now. I'd like to get the flow. I'd like to get more visibility. It's probably me being harsh. But the tool works. I am very happy with it.

We use Statseeker to monitor all the devices on our network. This includes:

• the network switches
• our gateways to the cloud
• our kiosks that are mounted throughout our building
• any other device we deem to be important

We want to know exactly when they go down.

In terms of network visibility, Statseeker can be very granular. We can tell it exactly where we want it to go and where we want it to check, or it can do an SNMP walk and find out where everything is. It's very detailed.

I find the speed of notification most valuable with using Statseeker. It's very quick with its notifications and the history is easily accessible. The history of outages, how long something's been down, how long something's been up. It has all that information there for us.

Now we know when things go down before we are called and told that something's not working. It allows us to fix something before our customer notices it's broken.

I would like the ability to update the dashboard. I would also like the ability to access via an API. Then I could produce a dashboard that my C level can understand. This is just so they can go and refresh whenever they want to and see what things look like.

The stability of Statseeker is rock solid.

Statseeker would scale just fine. I just don't need it for more than what I have it for. It would scale great. It's fast, light, and thin. 

We've done some WAN stuff, but are just getting into SDN.

When I had to use Statseeker technical support, it was good. However, in the beginning, the hours were a little strange because they're in Australia. For me on the East Coast, that's almost as far away as I could be. 

Now since they're in San Diego as well, I'm sure it will be fine. I haven't had to call them for tech support very often.

I deployed Statseeker myself. It was a little complex. Someone was there to walk me through it. I would never have figured out how to do certain things if it wasn't for the person that was on the phone helping me. As long as they're providing that, then it's good.

It's probably $5K a year for the license.

SolarWinds was on my shortlist. I was almost in with them. I had done some free things using Splunk etc. Once I saw the demonstration in the Cisco lab, I knew this would be the easiest solution for me to deploy and use.

Overall, Statseeker has reduced the complexity of our network monitoring once it's installed. It provides a single pane of glass to go and look at a snapshot if anything's down or having any transitions, i.e. within the last hour or last twenty-four hours. 

You can look at the data coordinator and if you see something red, you know something's wrong. If you don't see anything red, you know nothing's wrong. It just takes a glance. Even our help desk, if they're not in-network experienced, they can tell if something's down.

The single pane of glass for traditional and SDN affects our network management by making it easier to go to one place to be able to look at something as opposed to checking disparate systems all over the place.

For the workload of our network admin team, Statseeker has been a big help. Statseeker did reduce the amount of work they had to do. Even more, it focused them on what they had to do. Instead of chasing their tails, they could work on something that needed to be done. 

For our network availability, we see things that are up and down, like if something needs to be replaced or fixed. Everything stays up longer now. We don't have a lot of SDN. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Statseeker a nine. I like it a lot, especially the area where you define reports and where you set up the email alerts. 

The language used to formulate the email when you send it out could be done a little better. Statseeker gives you results that you can understand very quickly.

The biggest lesson that we've learned from using this solution is that you can't be everywhere at once, but this can.

Our primary use for this solution is to watch and record ports for the entire network.

We are now able to easily track where problems are with bandwidth and port errors, rather than having to do a lot of diagnostics.

The most valuable feature is its ease of use.

I would like to see fully automatic updates so that our version is always current.

The stability of this solution is excellent.

The scalability seems to be pretty good.

Technical support for this solution is good. Sometimes the response times need to be quicker, but their technical knowledge is very good.

Prior to using this solution, we were doing scripting to record bandwidth numbers, and this made things a whole lot simpler.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

We performed the implementation in-house.

We do not have the current version of this solution, but I would love for us to get it.

If you want something that is easy to use and catches the basics, especially for your first line people, then this is the product to go with.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use of Statseeker is for monitoring and the utilization of our network devices. We initially got Statseeker because we needed more visibility and better historical data.

I believe Statseeker has reduced the complexity of our network monitoring. Just one pane of glass allows you to go back in time to look at different patterns.

The solution has affected the workload of the network administrators in a positive way, letting them go back in time and see real-time stats.

Statseeker has provided real-time alerts and on-demand graphs, improving our network availability.

Being able to look back historically at the uptime and downtime is invaluable.

I love the solution's granularity. It's great.

I believe that Statseeker's support for both traditional and SDN reduces costs. I think it might reduce costs by 75%.

I haven't had any issues since I've been using it.

We're a pretty large organization and it scales great with us.

I don't think I have ever used tech support with Statseeker.

We haven't seen an ROI.

SolarWinds and Ipswitch were on our shortlist before we chose Statseeker.

Try to find someone who's worked with the solution, get their take on it, and maybe try to compare it with a different solution to see the pros and cons.

I would rate this as an eight out of ten. There are no perfect products out there, but Statseeker has been great. I've been using it for a few months now and it's served our purposes.

Our main use of Statseeker is for verifying traffic after several upgrades or failures.

We recently had a cluster of firewalls that wigged out and we were able to pinpoint it in a matter of minutes to find which one wigged out.

Statseeker helps reduce the complexity of our network monitoring because it's real-time, or somewhat real-time, so we're able to see stuff quickly and react to it.

I think it's reduced the workload of our network admin team, in the fact that they're able to verify relatively quick the capacity and utilization of the links.

The graphics and trends are the most valuable for us.

The solution's granularity has great detail, in terms of network visibility.

I would like to have soft alarming. If an inner-base all of a sudden triggers a threshold, we have to rely on a lot of other tools and then we go into Statseeker to verify it. If Statseeker would confirm it preemptively and trigger it into our network panel, that would be nice.

Training also has some room for improvement.

I've been very impressed with stability.

Previously, we used a variety of tools like some WAN and a lot of other in-house tools, but this is the one that we use a lot for confirmation.

The solution's support for both traditional and SDA reduces cost for us. I would say it has saved us about a quarter of a million dollars.

However, we have not yet seen an ROI.

It would definitely be a yearly licensing cost, but I don't know what it is.

Go into it with your eyes open and know what you're looking for. The biggest lesson is learning how to group everything together. We've got so many interfaces plugged into this device, it's kind of hard to hunt and peck. It'd be nice to know that going into it.

I would rate Statseeker as a nine out of ten.

We use it for bandwidth monitoring and email alerts when there are significant events like interfaces or devices that are down. Those are our big use cases.

Just recently, we were having some issues with a certain site, and it was only Statseeker that showed us what the problem was. It was a lot of errors on a certain circuit. Then we were able to resolve that.

There are other tools for network monitoring, but not to the level that Statseeker does. It tends to consolidate a lot of the questions that we would be going to other tools for. It helps in picking and choosing the answer.

I think this solution has reduced the workload time of our network admin team. It reduces the troubleshooting time when there is a problem.

I would like to think that it's increased our network availability.

The most valuable feature to me is that the data is there and you can easily get to it. I don't have to worry about a whole lot of maintenance for the product, it just seems to always work.

I'm very satisfied with the solution's granularity in terms of network visibility. As far as granularity, it's the best out there.

Maybe they could provide a little bit more flexibility on creating custom dashboards.

The only other thing that I wish that they would implement soon is that they don't support SNMPv3 TRAPs. I would like to see that back in.

It's very stable.

It tends to be very scalable, I don't have any problems at all. We have thousands of devices on it and we can easily add more.

It's very good. I very rarely use it, but when I do, they're very helpful.

I don't remember the initial setup, but upgrades are pretty straightforward.

We did the implementation ourselves. 

I think Statseeker's support for traditional networks reduces cost. It reduces cost because we don't have to have as many people trying to troubleshoot issues. It also helps us forecast if we need bandwidth upgrades or something like that. This means the company isn't dragged down by a circuit that's overloaded.

I would say, last year we probably saved about $100,000 - $150,000.

We have permanent licenses so there's really no cost, other than ongoing maintenance. When I think about it, that's running us about $20,000 a year.

I would definitely advise them to look closely at it because it's been a benefit to us and I believe that there is a lot of value there, especially if you're in a bandwidth-constrained environment. It's not as common nowadays, but back in the day when people were trying to push as much as they could down a single T1 line, it was a little bit more critical.

The biggest lesson I've learned is that everything is always changing on your network and Statseeker tends to show these things before they become bad things. So they anticipate, or proactively identify the problem, or at least give you a head's up that it's likely to be an issue.

I love it. I would give it a nine-plus out of ten.

We use it for network monitoring, mainly for our core in-campus devices. 

Statseeker helps us in diagnosing problems. For example, if you see a heavy amount of traffic on a link, it's really easy in Statseeker to reverse engineer where that traffic is coming from, and troubleshoot your way backwards, hop by hop, along the path.

In terms of network complexity, this solution just helps. You're dealing with real data. With other tools, everything's rolled up into averages and it can mask some issues at times. We find it really useful to be able to get down to that per-minute statistics because it gives you a more realistic view of what's going on.

I don't think it has affected our availability. It's really just getting us the monitoring details.

The most important feature for us is how fast this solution is, as well as the granularity that you can get to, such as per-minute statistics. These are really useful for us.

This solution is fantastic in terms of granularity of network visibility. We also have SolarWinds Orion in our environment. Statseeker closed it away, in terms of performance and how granular you can get with the statistics.

The interface could improve a little bit. I find with new users, I tend to have to spend a bit of time walking them through how to use the interface. It could be a little more user-friendly. Once you get it, you get it, but it seems to take a bit of time. It's not super intuitive for new users.

In terms of additional features, in our environment, we run Cisco ONS, Optical Networking System. There are certain statistics that you can pull from those devices, and it's a less common platform, so I don't think there's a lot of support for the ONS. It would be handy for us to have ONS support within Statseeker.

It would be nice if they open it up for additional support with different vendors.

Its scalability is great. The only limitation that we've ran into is the licensing with the number of interfaces that we're licensed for. But we run it on some fairly old server hardware, and it works just fine. That's with 30,000 interfaces.

It's a fairly easy product to support. We just install it and it kind of runs. So we haven't really had to spend much time with care and feeding other than trying to upgrade it manually.

It's been very good. I've only had to engage them once or twice during the initial install, but both times it was a positive experience.

We were having trouble getting meaningful statistics out of our other monitoring solutions.

We used SolarWinds Orion and we still use it to some extent for other purposes. We switched to get that granularity that Statseeker provides. I find it really onerous to get meaningful data out of Orion. The data is there, but it takes a long time to get at, and the performance isn't quite there. Statseeker is very fast.

It's very easy. Just a simple install. You put the CD in, walk through it and it's up and running.

We did it ourselves.

I think we have seen a return on our investment in terms of productivity gained from our operational team. I don't think I have any hard numbers to share, but just observing from within the operations team, I see how much quicker they're able to access the information.

I can't remember what the initial cost was, but I think we paid $5,000 to $10,000 a year in maintenance.

I'd absolutely recommend it. It's a great product.

The biggest lesson I've learned from using Statseeker is the fact that granularity matters. If you look at a problem over 15-minute averages, or 30-minute averages, you don't get the same information. You don't reach the same conclusions that you do if you're working on one-minutes averages.

I would rate this as a nine out of ten. It's really easy to use. We don't need to spend a lot of time trying to keep it up-to-date or maintained or anything like that. It just really runs in the background and it's there when we need it.

Capacity management of devices and carriage services.

Summary Reports provide a quick way to identify where potential issues are. Drill-downs provide more granular details very quickly.

• Custom reporting
• 95th Percentile
• Trend lines

Detailed data can be hard to extract in CSV form. Sometimes, being able to dump down raw data would be good so various time periods across a longer period could be analysed. At present, data can be presented within Statseeker, but there is lots of "white space" between data points.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

Excellent. Support team is brilliant. Always responsive. Always positive.

Currently using a variety of tools across multiple accounts.

We are using the Professional edition but would love to upgrade to the higher level Enterprise, as having the full feature set would be the way to go.

Understand what your outputs and customer requirements are first. Then configure the environment to support those needs.

Interface monitoring, mainly for interface statistics. We use it for monitoring up/down, capacity management, bandwidth utilization, reporting.

Prior to using it, the company was using something really basic, it was very slow and it didn't have descriptive statistics at all. Statseeker provides a lot more graphics, the reports are very user friendly, the tools are very easy to use, and it's very quick.

The most important feature for us is the interface statistics, because our customer normally asks us for bandwidth utilization reports. Statseeker has very descriptive transmit and receive information.

I spoke to James Wells from Statseeker. We use an application called Dynatrace, which was formerly Compuware, and he was saying that they might be able to integrate Statseeker with Dynatrace. What Dynatrace does is application monitoring. So if we went to look at say some statistics and we could see some high traffic, we could drill down into that traffic and then down to the application. So James was saying that could be possible, and that would be a great improvement.

Very stable, and the support has been fantastic. Every time I've had an issue they've always assisted me straight away.

Not at all, it's one of the best tools I have. It's so quick I could run reports in a matter of seconds, whereas with some of the other systems they take minutes. Sometimes they time out. With Statseeker, I could do the last year's reports in a couple of minutes. Very happy with it.

They always give me a call, and they're always at hand if I need help. Last time I did an upgrade they were on the phone right away, assisting me with almost every step, you could say. Tech support has been fantastic. I've had issues where backups have failed and they've sat with me to work out the problem. So very good.

They used a system called Cacti and it wasn't user friendly. To get to an interface it took a long time. You'd go to the router and from the router you had to find the interface. It wasn't as easy as Statseeker. With Statseeker you can just click on a router or switch, click on the Reporting Tool and it will show every single interface and you just click on the one you want. With this one you had to physically find them. The graphs weren't very good at all. It didn't compare.

We now feel the pricing is a good value. Previously we had a just a normal license but now we've got an Enterprise license. Since the Enterprise, it's been a lot better value. We did think it was pretty expensive before, but with the Enterprise license it's almost less than half that price.

If you have a number of accounts within the organization that use Statseeker, I would suggest get the Enterprise license.

Go for it. I recommend it. I think it's great value. 

It's an easy tool to use. Support is fantastic and Statseeker are always looking to improve. We've had a few meetings where they always ask for suggestions on how they can improve their system to tailor it to customers' requirements.

The fact that it doesn't aggregate the information up, it's very good at troubleshooting. The fact that you have all the information there, it's very easy if you require the information to go back and get it. It's very quick when you're doing a report or when you're looking at something, it's very quick to give you the information. How it improves how we function: its ease of use and its responsiveness.

The most important feature is just the fact that it doesn't aggregate the information up, and I can look at detailed information going back quite a long time. I find that useful in my role.

Overall it is quite stable when. The main issue I've seen, in the last six months to a year, is when I upgrade I seem to be hitting bugs. The upgrade won't go smoothly and I have to engage support. These things happen when you upgrade, it's not the end of the world, but from a stability point of view, the only time I've so far, is during upgrades. And there have been one or two bugs that I've seen across the years, but overall it's quite a stable product.

At least in our deployment, I wouldn't say we've had any scalability issues as of yet. For our environment it seems to be okay.

I have to say they're quite very good. I've never had any issues getting in contact with them. They're quite responsive, so I can't really complain about that.

I've been using the same product in my environment for all the time I've been here.

As Statseeker has released extra features into the product, we have migrated sections of other tools. We have stopped using other tools for various things that we migrated into Statseeker. Why did we switch? It came back to either quickness of reporting, or the fact that other tools did aggregate the information up over a timeframe; with Statseeker we can go back over a time and actually have a look at stuff. The previous product we were using, it would age out the information or aggregate the information up. So, we weren't able to look back in an extended timeframe.

I haven't had to set up the product myself. I've had to build a new server and migrate from the old server to the new server. If I was to treat that as an installation, it was relatively okay, apart from running into one or two technical issues which I had to troubleshoot and to fix. Once I got passed that technical issue, to actually install the product was relatively simple, and to get it up and running was relatively simple.

One thing that needs improvement is how it's licensed. I understand historically the company licensed it off a same charge for everyone. I understand the company needs to make money, but how they introduced the tiered licensing model, and then multiple layers of licensing was a bit of an issue. So, on the whole, coming up with a licensing model that isn't confusing and complicated and is easy to understand would be one way to improve the product.

In terms of licensing, I would say, talk to Statseeker and find out because historically there was multiple layers of licensing. It's confusing. Read through it, try and understand it, ask lots of questions, and make up your mind what you want to do. 

They have told me lately that they're changing how they license stuff, but they haven't made that - as I understand it - in their marketing material public knowledge as of yet.

But I would basically say, if somebody was asking me what do I think of the licensing, I would say that at the moment it's a bit convoluted. It's confusing. Some of their basic licensing model is a bit of a ripoff. If you go over five or ten support calls in the basic licensing model they start charging you for support calls. I think that's a bit rich.

They need to make sure they don't price themselves out of market. They've been quite flexible in the last six months, and they've been good in negotiating the costs, but those are my two main things: making the licensing model easier to understand, and keeping their cost competitive compared to the rest of the market.

Up until we actually talked to Statseeker, and Statseeker came and gave us an enterprise licensing model for multiple accounts, I would have said the pricing was not good value. The fact they've come to the party now and given us a very good discount, I would say it's probably about right, the pricing they're giving us now. But the retail pricing, if I went out and, as a separate company, and asked for pricing for one account, I probably would say their retail pricing is not competitive. The fact that they've given us a discount now because we have multiple servers across multiple accounts, I would say that pricing is about right, but not their retail pricing. It's too expensive.

I would say you would need to understand the licensing model and figure out which one you want to buy and for what reasons. It's not a simple, "Just sign up."

I came into the environment after it was already built. We did compare it against another product to see if the other product could take over from Statseeker, and we determined that that was not possible. We have that other product in our environment and it does other tasks that Statseeker can't do. So, when we evaluated another product against it, we found it wasn't up to what Statseeker could do.

I do know of one or two products out in the market that are targeting themselves at the same niche that Statseeker has. That being said, I have not really played around with Statseeker's competitors and played them off each other as of yet.

From an end-user point of view, I would say it's fairly intuitive once you've got it up and running, once you've spent some time on it. It's a fairly intuitive product as to how to generate reports. It just takes time to work your way through it. Maybe you could get a trainer or a subject matter expert to show people how to do stuff, but the more time you spend on the product, the more you get to understand it, and the easier it is to use. It's not super-complicated to use. There's a reasonable number of instruction videos from Statseeker. It's not a complicated product to use from an end-user perspective and to get people up to scratch.

If you need a product that's able to monitor all the ports in your environment or all the ports that you want, this is a great product to use. Statseeker is quite flexible in tailoring the product, spending time tailoring the product with you. It's fairly low maintenance. It's quite quick.

It's a good tool at what it does, but it's not a tool that you would install in a network operation center to deliver alerts to your tier-1 operators. It's not a Zenoss or an HPE OVO, it's more of a tool that's an eyes-on-glass type of thing. It works in its own niche.

My advice would be, you have to figure out what you actually want the tool to do, and whether or not what you want is what Statseeker is going to give you. We have multiple tools in our environment, which address separate areas, and Statseeker can't do everything. So before you buy it, figure out if the capability the product has is actually what you're trying to address.

I'd give it an eight out of 10, and the reason is it's a very all round good product, but for quite a long time the impression that we got was they weren't developing the product. There weren't any new features coming out. Now that being said, over the last year or two, it seems like they've had new personnel come on board, and they've started to put in new features, and started to be more customer focused; they've started to develop the product. But if they want to stay in the market, in my opinion, they need to keep on developing the product and adding features, because there are other players out in the market that they seem to be constantly adding new features and tweaking the product on quite a regular basis.

That being said, I haven't tried the competitors' products, but it seems to me, the other players in the market are developing product at a rapid pace. So they need to keep up.

It's servicing our requirements at the moment and Statseeker is very flexible. When we ask them, "Can you put this feature in?" they'll work with us and help us out, but we're just one account. What I'm trying to say is, I could see how, if I was a person comparing products at the moment, if there was a fresh environment, I would probably play Statseeker off against the other main competitor, which I believe is AKIPS, and I would tick which one I like the most and serves my need the best, and to be honest it might not be Statseeker.

Statseeker is a great product. It's doing what we need. But if we wanted to switch over to another product it would require a lot of work, because there is all sorts of stuff we do with Statseeker which we would have to rewrite. We're a happy enough customer at the moment, but that might not be the case if I went somewhere else and somebody said to me, "You need to buy a product." Would I necessarily buy Statseeker? Maybe I would, maybe I wouldn't. That's why I'm giving it an eight, because I'm not automatically saying I'm going to implement this wherever I go. If I need to address an issue that Statseeker can help me out with, and if a company was coming to me saying, "This is your budget," then I would compare it with other products beforehand.