Associate Vice President - CIS (Internal IT) at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-07-26T10:28:39Z
Jul 26, 2023
It doesn't have a CMDB, which is a basic one. It didn't have two or three other features which we were hunting for. Also, the Correlation feature was missing because it did not have CMDB. The reporting was not that great as well. The reporting was very, very shoddy and very basic. Additionally, Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also. It was not part of it. Now every system, such as monitoring systems or any system for that matter, requires high availability, which means that by design, that system has a failover mechanism. When there are issues identified, there has to be a quick response and then a resolution. Kaseya Traverse had none of this. We started realizing this over a period of time, and very specifically when it reached the state where the version and revision updates were not done. We started facing very, very huge problems. We were using it for a very basic purpose. So when it happened that we had to do the update, every time we raised the issue with Kaseya Traverse, they would say that you needed to update, and only then will the issue be addressed, multiple issues, We said, okay, go ahead. We also gave them a different cloud server, our server. They created an image of it, and they promised that everything would go smoother. The moment they upgraded and started migrating, every service failed. For a period, we had a blackout, and then it started coming up. They could not restore the service completely. For every issue we were facing, whatever issues we had, which they said after version update or upgrade, everything would get sorted out, none of them got sorted out. Even the normal functions which were working in the preview version did not work, and they said everything had to go to the engineering team, and they needed to come back. We had a very, very, very horrible time, and we regret it. First of all, having agreed to an upgrade because by upgrading, neither the earlier issues, which they said would get resolved by upgrading, got resolved, nor the functions which were already working came up, nor did we have any new benefits. We decided and concluded that we would move away from Kaseya Traverse. There is no one person whom we can go to. We were taken up to be a chief operating officer, or maybe the chief delivery officer and head of design something, nice people, but that didn't help us. Many, many, many, many, many issues bogged us down. In fact, we had to pay a penalty to our customers for not monitoring and for having issues.
National Support Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2022-12-13T15:36:07Z
Dec 13, 2022
Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect. Development is needed for reporting because it is almost nonexistent. Workflows and AI are missing from the solution.
Associate Vice President - CIS (Internal IT) at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2021-06-23T15:44:18Z
Jun 23, 2021
Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us. Additionally, competitors have been integrating a Network Visualizer as part of their offering and this is something that would be a good benefit to have in this solution.
In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has. As things change and as new products come in, we look at different plugins and all those things. The reason why we're using Kaseya is because it's a full solution. It's one supplier, it's plugged into a lot of things like a customer documentation system. It keeps all their setups, documents, all those types of things and it just integrates with a lot of the other tools that the MSPs use. It is very user friendly.
National Support Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2020-07-27T07:17:00Z
Jul 27, 2020
We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product. The development of the signature or request takes a lot of time. However, the development is very slow at their end. As is the support. This might be why. Everything goes to the product team and lab, even for small requests and even if it makes sense to send it through to the product team instead. In any case, they aren't adding any signatures to the devices, and I cannot give the tool to my customers if there isn't the capability to add it to the tool. I can't go to my customer and tell them it isn't possible. They have not even developed a signature for basic things that are being upgraded, like Exchange 2010. They have not yet added the signature after Exchange 2010 and it's now 2020. That's a serious concern. We are running on Exchange 2019 and Office 365. Now 2019 is not yet being developed. On top of that, with Microsoft HyperV, they are still using the old 2008 signature. That has also not been upgraded anywhere. There are many things that are not developed as per the industry. When we take any contract from a customer, it is agreed that I will monitor each and every device that they have in their data center. It causes an issue for me when I can't deliver due to some issues on the solution's side. It makes clients unhappy. I'm facing many support issues with them. I am actually looking for another solution to purchase.
Immediately identify impacted IT services using insights based on rich data analytics of events such as SNMP traps, Windows events and Syslogs. Resolve faults quickly via NetFlow enabled root cause analysis across cloud, on-premise, hybrid cloud and virtualized IT environments.
Reporting is a bit difficult. It’s very cumbersome to set up new reports.
It doesn't have a CMDB, which is a basic one. It didn't have two or three other features which we were hunting for. Also, the Correlation feature was missing because it did not have CMDB. The reporting was not that great as well. The reporting was very, very shoddy and very basic. Additionally, Dashboards and Central Protection were an issue. Also, database monitoring was not there. Even though they said that it was there at an additional cost, that tool was very basic. We couldn't have device configuration backup also. It was not part of it. Now every system, such as monitoring systems or any system for that matter, requires high availability, which means that by design, that system has a failover mechanism. When there are issues identified, there has to be a quick response and then a resolution. Kaseya Traverse had none of this. We started realizing this over a period of time, and very specifically when it reached the state where the version and revision updates were not done. We started facing very, very huge problems. We were using it for a very basic purpose. So when it happened that we had to do the update, every time we raised the issue with Kaseya Traverse, they would say that you needed to update, and only then will the issue be addressed, multiple issues, We said, okay, go ahead. We also gave them a different cloud server, our server. They created an image of it, and they promised that everything would go smoother. The moment they upgraded and started migrating, every service failed. For a period, we had a blackout, and then it started coming up. They could not restore the service completely. For every issue we were facing, whatever issues we had, which they said after version update or upgrade, everything would get sorted out, none of them got sorted out. Even the normal functions which were working in the preview version did not work, and they said everything had to go to the engineering team, and they needed to come back. We had a very, very, very horrible time, and we regret it. First of all, having agreed to an upgrade because by upgrading, neither the earlier issues, which they said would get resolved by upgrading, got resolved, nor the functions which were already working came up, nor did we have any new benefits. We decided and concluded that we would move away from Kaseya Traverse. There is no one person whom we can go to. We were taken up to be a chief operating officer, or maybe the chief delivery officer and head of design something, nice people, but that didn't help us. Many, many, many, many, many issues bogged us down. In fact, we had to pay a penalty to our customers for not monitoring and for having issues.
Reporting is tedious and not organized in the way customers expect. Development is needed for reporting because it is almost nonexistent. Workflows and AI are missing from the solution.
Kaseya Traverse can improve by adding a Service Map to help us create a configuration management database (CMDB), this would be helpful for us. Additionally, competitors have been integrating a Network Visualizer as part of their offering and this is something that would be a good benefit to have in this solution.
In terms of what could be improved, we are innovating all the time, as well as having a look at different avenues so that the strategy follows the structure. I think the software is still a little bit too new to actually fully asses what it has. As things change and as new products come in, we look at different plugins and all those things. The reason why we're using Kaseya is because it's a full solution. It's one supplier, it's plugged into a lot of things like a customer documentation system. It keeps all their setups, documents, all those types of things and it just integrates with a lot of the other tools that the MSPs use. It is very user friendly.
We've noticed a few bugs as of late. However, this seems to only be in the reporting part of the product. The development of the signature or request takes a lot of time. However, the development is very slow at their end. As is the support. This might be why. Everything goes to the product team and lab, even for small requests and even if it makes sense to send it through to the product team instead. In any case, they aren't adding any signatures to the devices, and I cannot give the tool to my customers if there isn't the capability to add it to the tool. I can't go to my customer and tell them it isn't possible. They have not even developed a signature for basic things that are being upgraded, like Exchange 2010. They have not yet added the signature after Exchange 2010 and it's now 2020. That's a serious concern. We are running on Exchange 2019 and Office 365. Now 2019 is not yet being developed. On top of that, with Microsoft HyperV, they are still using the old 2008 signature. That has also not been upgraded anywhere. There are many things that are not developed as per the industry. When we take any contract from a customer, it is agreed that I will monitor each and every device that they have in their data center. It causes an issue for me when I can't deliver due to some issues on the solution's side. It makes clients unhappy. I'm facing many support issues with them. I am actually looking for another solution to purchase.