Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

We used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for network monitoring until I was no longer with the institution.

It expedited processes by allowing us to graphically see where issues were occurring and track them in real-time, which improved our efficiency. It also empowered entry-level technicians by enabling them to respond to incidents without direction.

The ability to view configurations in plain text and gather all device configurations was very handy. We appreciated the dashboard statistics for identifying problem areas and found the logical topology maps to be helpful. Auvik Core's ease of use also enhanced troubleshooting speed and efficiency.

We were unable to integrate Auvik with a geographical map, which limited our ability to track issues to specific buildings on campus. Compared to other products like SolarWinds, Auvik needs a similar feature. Additionally, the cost was high.

I was involved with Auvik for just under two years.

The quality and speed of Auvik's customer support were excellent. They were knowledgeable and responded quickly with accurate and useful information.

Positive

We have used SolarWinds. The main difference is Auvik provides a high-level network topology by default and has a better graphical interface. However, SolarWinds has a comparable dashboard at a high level.

The initial setup involved placing the collector on a server and sending it up to the cloud. It was straightforward.

Two people were required to implement Auvik.

Auvik is pricey, and we were paying a lot for it, especially when compared to SolarWinds.

We considered SolarWinds as it has comparable features.

Auvik offers free training to become an Auvik Certified Professional, which is highly recommended.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for network monitoring, packet pushing for updates as well as troubleshooting and backups.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) provides a real-time image of the network and a good breakdown as to what's connected to what, and how the information is being transferred between each item or device on that network. 

Automated documentation is very good for reporting changes or network issues that may have occurred or even allowing for proper backups and situational awareness. It's quite intuitive on that aspect. Some network monitoring software don't actually keep a record or have that documentation to preview, and Auvik does, which is very useful.

In terms of visibility, there is a limited view, but that's only because other software have more integrated accesses. Auvik does quite a lot for itself.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) has decreased a whole lot of time and allotment because of how useful it is and the automated features.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) is really good for monitoring network issues and troubleshooting. When it comes to troubleshooting, Auvik is quite easy. It's very nice, and it does tell us exactly where the issue is, and we can follow the trail back to wherever it may or whatever device may be causing the issue. It's great when it comes to doing that.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) has a pretty good impact on reducing network related issues, and it's quite fundamental for most IT companies if they're trying to set up multiple different locations or assets.

Automated alerts from Auvik Network Management (ANM) were very useful when it came to limiting support tickets because it provided enough information that we could review in a few seconds any issues that may have occurred and provided fairly documented information and reports. It made our job much easier on a good percentage of the tasks compared to other software that we also ran side by side.

A lot of the automated features and reporting of Auvik Network Management (ANM) made things a whole lot easier. We were able to monitor things a little bit more in detail. We weren't looking around for what happened or what's going on there. It was quite great in that aspect.

We could see its benefits pretty quickly. It didn't take very long to pick it up. It is automated.

One of the features we appreciated the most about Auvik Network Management (ANM) was the auto mapping of the networks and quick and easy installation. It was very informative and allowed us to view things such as when networks and information were becoming bottlenecked by other resources. It was very useful for alternative aspects, such as monitoring a network whenever it went down or came back up, and it allowed us to have a really good user interface. 

The user interface of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is quite intuitive. It was very detailed. Generally, it was very user-friendly. 

The network map can become quite cramped if there are too many devices connected to one access port at the same time. It may become a little bit harder because of how compiled it would be. However, a lot of the businesses we worked with had already very structured devices and setups, so we didn't have as much congestion. I could see how that would be an issue.

They can implement a more collective network mapping to help reduce any congestive features. When it came down to many of the companies we worked with, their networks were already pre-structured, so we didn't have as much congestion. Given the fact that I could see how that would be an issue, maybe there would be a better way they could collapse or compile the network mapping issues.

I used Auvik Network Management (ANM) for approximately 2 years in my earlier company.

There was a time that I did see a little bit of instability but that was mostly regarding electrical interferences in specific areas due to weather concerns. Auvik's automated reporting system also details interferences or any lagging other than outside interference from electrical sources. I never saw Auvik itself have any glitching or issues within the software.

Surprisingly, I have not had to contact the technical support of Auvik Network Management (ANM), which is awesome.

Neutral

For network monitoring, we also used vSphere as an alternative to Auvik Network Management (ANM). Generally, that's more of a portal access or integrated access into software or into a device in comparison to a network outside view. It had similar aspects where we could see the device, the upkeep, and the network control and troubleshoot issues. However, it was much much easier to review the information from Auvik compared to going into vSphere. 

We had Bitdefender as another solution, but that's more of an antivirus software. It does have a little bit of network monitoring, but it was mostly defensive software rather than networking.

The deployment of an Auvik Network Management (ANM) device or deploying the software into a device is super easy. A lot of the setup is automated, so it was really great. It was fast to deploy, so it's great software. It was much better than most of the other things that I've had to deploy. 

Time required depends on the network. If it's a small network, it might take about 5 minutes. If it's a larger and more complex network with more setups, it might take about 15 to 30 minutes. 

As far as maintenance is concerned, we didn't have much to do with the maintenance of Auvik itself. However, we did do monitoring services, such as monitoring the networks to make sure that there were no issues with Auvik and the software itself. We never experienced any issues where we had to do any re-upkeep or re-installation.

We only need one person to deploy Auvik Network Management (ANM) or to deploy one of the Auvik Network Management (ANM) accesses.

I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) a solid nine out of ten. It is a very easy to use software. It's great. It's good for setting up and monitoring a network. It does have its limitations. It's not going to let you port into a device in case of an issue, but it will let you go ahead and troubleshoot, monitor, and review. It has great documentation and good upkeep. It doesn't have any lagging, and it's pretty solid software.

My use case for Auvik Network Management (ANM) has been network management, as the company I was with at the time had a lot of networks and networks that they didn't even know existed. They hadn't had IT in 10 years, so we had to do a little bit of network management and I had to find all their switches, IPs, and things like that. 

Auvik Network Management (ANM) was an excellent tool for that. Being able to hone in on networks by just putting it on the DC server and sending out those pings really allowed me to build a network. I

appreciate the ability to log in to different switches with the click of a button, using the SNMP map and having that login information there, because it allows you to skip going through each IP individually and trying to log in manually.

The interface of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is by far the easiest to use. I've worked with ThousandEyes, I've worked with ELK, and Auvik Network Management (ANM) was the better option, easily. The interface is straight and dry, and I appreciate the fact that when I started using it, I got a chance to see that physical, visual mapping of all my switches and what they're connected to. The dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) gives me full network visibility without needing other software; I didn't have too many problems with the dashboard overall, and it was quite good. 

The network visibility provided by Auvik Network Management (ANM) is very important for my company because we want to be able to detect and address issues efficiently. One thing that ThousandEyes has over Auvik Network Management (ANM) is that it can detect bottlenecks faster, identifying what causes network space to clutter. Auvik Network Management (ANM) does something similar, but not as in-depth as ThousandEyes.

I had thought about requesting an AI interface for Auvik Network Management (ANM), but I think they already have that now. The only issue I see is that the pricing was a bit much for our needs; if they could break it down into specific pricing points to be more affordable for larger companies, that would help, as getting that through the budget team was challenging.

I have been using Auvik Network Management (ANM) for about a year and a half in my career.

I haven't seen any problems with stability using Auvik Network Management (ANM), such as lagging, crashing, or downtime.

The scalability of Auvik Network Management (ANM) is excellent, rating at the highest level possible.

I did have to contact customer support for Auvik Network Management (ANM), and it was difficult to try to get in touch with the sales representatives. They have a general number along with personal numbers that some of them call from. One representative, Josh, was really good and fantastic; I just didn't have his number. I had to call regular support, which was challenging to get to the specific representative I wanted. However, when I did reach him, he was great.

The deployment process and installation of Auvik Network Management (ANM) were great. The fact that they walk you through a demo on how to set it up was amazing. It was straightforward; you just install it on your DC server, and it sends out all the pings to different servers or switches and routers to gather information. As long as you have the correct login, you're good.

When comparing Auvik Network Management (ANM) and ThousandEyes, I prefer Auvik Network Management (ANM) because I prefer the interface. The interface is easier to understand and use—there aren't many extra tidbits to go through. You can just get straight to the data, click on a device, and configure it if needed. I found ThousandEyes more difficult to use.

I was managing one plant on the East Coast with Auvik Network Management (ANM) and I managed to possibly get one in another state, without any significant issues. It can be cluttered if you manage around 700 sites, but for smaller scale, it works perfectly. 

It took me about a day to fully understand how to use Auvik Network Management (ANM), so the learning curve was quite manageable. 

For maintenance as an end user, there are no updates required on their end, but it does inform me when I need to update and configure policies on switches and routers. I actually had to do that on a firewall as well. 

I would rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) overall as 20 out of 10.

We use Auvik Network Management primarily for network purposes, including monitoring and optimizing alerts. It provides an easy-to-use interface that is user-friendly, even for those who may not be familiar with navigating network platforms.

Auvik Network Management is user-friendly and intuitive. It simplifies troubleshooting network issues and provides a real-time picture of the network through its dashboard. 

The features support ease of use, making it accessible even for new users. Its proactive monitoring and simplified troubleshooting have significantly impacted our efficiency in handling network management tasks.

The network maps can be confusing due to the wide scope of the network, making it difficult to find specific details. Improvements in the network exclusions part would be helpful, as well as enhancements in API functionality and wider tool support for integration with PSA or RMM tools.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

The stability of Auvik Network Management is rated as seven out of ten. There were a few instances of downtime in the year, which took some time to resolve.

I rate the scalability of Auvik Network Management as eight out of ten. The platform scales well and supports our organizational needs.

The customer service and support are rated as six out of ten. Although the support is good, resolving time takes longer than expected, especially for major issues that require escalation.

Neutral

We use Meraki as well for network management.

The initial setup of Auvik Network Management is straightforward and not complex. Setting up new users takes about 20 minutes, and the whole setup process can take around two hours.

I set up Auvik Network Management for new users in the organization.

The return on investment from using Auvik Network Management is estimated at three to four percent due to the time saved in managing network issues efficiently.

I highly recommend Auvik Network Management because it is used by many firms and is a reliable application. 

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

I used to work with an organization supporting multiple clients. We implemented Auvik Network Management for some of them, not all of them. 

It was interesting how fast Auvik Network Management could discover the network, how it kept monitoring it and updating us with alerts of any spikes in the traffic, and everything else. It was amazing.

Auvik Network Management reduced the downtime and sped up the recovery.

Auvik Network Management helped our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own because it simplifies the process. It lets you find where the problems are faster. It gives you a clearer view of the situation, where you can see the complete network in front of you graphically. You can see all the devices and where the problem is. When you highlight one of them, you can see all the details.

Auvik Network Management decreased issues because it allowed us to monitor the entire network, all the devices, and check the alerts in a timely manner. We could deal with issues quickly.

The best feature of Auvik Network Management is simplicity. It is friendly to use. 

The dashboard is good. It gives a clear vision for all the aspects of the services that Auvik Network Management provides. We can go to different places and monitor, check, configure, and analyze traffic.

I did not have the chance to go through all the aspects or services that Auvik Network Management provides, but what I dealt with was good, and there was not much to complain about. However, its pricing was a little bit higher. 

I used Auvik Network Management for a couple of months. It was implemented in 2024.

It was stable.

We dealt with different clients, from small to large ones. We used Auvik Network Management on all of them. It was capable of handling all those clients perfectly.

We used their customer service directly. We did not rely much on the documentation. Whenever we had any issues, we used to call their support centers and book a meeting with them.

We had a couple of meetings with them. They introduced the product to us and explained how to deal with it. They had their own support, and we relied on them.

Positive

We used N-able previously. Auvik Network Management was implemented to replace N-able in a certain phase. N-able is similar to Auvik Network Management without the graphics, but it has alerting, monitoring, controlling, updating, and patching capabilities.

N-able is an old product. It is not as modern as Auvik Network Management. Auvik Network Management is easier to deal with and faster to get results from.

It was easy. Auvik Network Management was very easy to set up. It does everything by itself.

It was a matter of minutes to set it up. It did not take a long time to start gathering information. After we installed it on one of our machines, it started gathering information and drawing the network. It is very reliable.

The pricing was a little bit higher. They can work on that as everybody wants to save money.

I would rate Auvik Network Management a nine out of ten.

Our company develops its own software solutions and prioritizes user safety, particularly in Europe, where we focus on compliance and education regarding student protection online. This includes content like radicalization, drug exposure, and self-harm. To ensure our own SaaS-based service, offered in both Europe and the US, functions optimally, we utilize Auvik for infrastructure monitoring.

A major challenge has been keeping our on-call teams engaged. Previously, our lack of automation meant that someone had to wake up in the middle of the night to check tickets and logs, ensuring everything was running smoothly. However, Auvik's automation and reporting features have transformed our process. Now, we only get woken up proactively when something actually goes wrong, thanks to Auvik leveraging other tools in conjunction with its own functionalities. This has significantly improved our on-call experience.

Our network management solution, Auvik, is deployed across a hybrid cloud environment. We utilize a mix of cloud providers, including AWS in the UK and Canada, DigitalOcean in the UK, Amsterdam, Germany, France, India, Singapore, San Francisco, Virginia, and Toronto, and four of our own data centers located in the UK, North America, and Amsterdam.

Real-time network visibility was a key factor in choosing Auvik, made possible by its helpful network mapping. While we previously relied on other, more cumbersome software, Auvik's ease of use is a game-changer. Onboarding new employees takes just 20 minutes thanks to the intuitive interface. In contrast, our prior system required countless documents for even basic tasks like adding or removing a host or checking resource utilization. Thankfully, Auvik's intuitive design streamlines these processes.

Since implementing Auvik in April, we've only had one incident, which Auvik fortunately caught in real-time. We received notification within 40 seconds of the event, allowing us to swiftly address it. As the COO responsible for service delivery, I'm impressed. Previously, such issues might have gone unnoticed until the morning. Thankfully, with Auvik, we were up and running within five minutes, and full resolution followed shortly after. In essence, Auvik helped us reduce a potential outage from several hours to a mere 20 minutes.

We anticipated the benefits of Auvik upon deployment, and these expectations were confirmed two weeks later when we encountered an incident that was swiftly addressed.

Auvik has helped reduce our mean time to resolution from a few hours to a few minutes.

Auvik streamlines our network management by automating tasks like agent deployment and configuration. With SNMP enabled on new servers, Auvik automatically discovers them and adds them to the correct network map, saving us significant time compared to manual setup and troubleshooting.

The time savings are resulting in more time being dedicated to other tasks.

The way Auvik allows us to manage our infrastructure provides a top-level view of everything, solving several past issues. This includes streamlining on-call duties and maintaining an accurate asset inventory. Our deployment consists of one main site with 46 smaller sites, each running various cloud and production services. These can be managed individually, or we can leverage the top-level view for overall control, saving us time and money in the long run using Auvik.

While Auvik excels at out-of-the-box SNMP monitoring, a major selling point, maintaining services over time often requires custom development to ensure they function and transmit data properly. Ideally, Auvik could integrate the results from these custom applications and scripts directly, streamlining the monitoring process.

Auvik delivers on its core functionalities as advertised, with a smooth deployment and execution process. While the asset management features are helpful for basic network inventory, increased customization for data presentation would be beneficial. This could include integrating custom application results or incorporating data from our own monitoring scripts. It's important to remember that asset management isn't a core function of Auvik, but rather a bonus feature. While additional customization would be a welcome improvement, it's not a core expectation of the software.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for two months.

Auvik Network Management has been stable with no hiccups.

Auvik is handling our network workload well and shows no signs of scalability issues. Of course, we'll need to monitor performance as we grow and add more hardware, but for now, things are running smoothly.

My experience with their customer success team has been fantastic. They've even included technical support for review purposes during our calls.

Positive

We previously relied on a number of custom monitoring tools, including Nagios for system uptime and network capacity, and MRTG for generating graphs. These have all been replaced by Auvik, which provides these functionalities out of the box. We've also done away with internal alert triggers and manual asset lists, and now rely solely on Auvik in conjunction with PagerDuty for notifications and asset management, respectively. This has eliminated the need for maintaining separate spreadsheets and manual processes.

While Nagios is powerful, it demands significant effort and customization. In contrast, Auvik provides essential, out-of-the-box monitoring tools necessary to maintain network uptime. This ease of use allowed us to deploy it across 46 sites in under two hours.

The Auvik deployment started during the trial phase with a collector installed on a few test networks. After successful evaluation, transitioning to full production involved a simple firewall rule change and a one-page document outlining the rollout process, including a maintenance window and proper site naming. Since launch, the team has been fine-tuning the pre-configured alerts to minimize noise and ensure they only trigger when necessary.

One resource was required for the deployment.

Our team handled the deployment process ourselves, and Auvik's customer success team provided us with direct feedback throughout the process.

While traditional ROI might not apply since I don't resell Auvik, the return we're seeing is in engineer productivity. Auvik automates monitoring tasks, freeing them up for other projects. It's still early – only a month and a half – but so far it's been fantastic. We're tracking how much time is saved, and if this trend continues, Auvik will be a major success for our team.

Among the products considered, Auvik stood out for its competitive pricing. While Datadog was considerably more expensive, Auvik offered features and pricing similar to NetData. The Auvik team's customer success and account management teams impressed us with their ability to secure discounts and other incentives, making the deal even more attractive.

Our monitoring covers a large number of devices, well over 150 in total. While our billing reflects around 40 devices, most of these are Linux servers which are included in our monitoring package. This includes virtual machines where the servers reside, and we receive alerts for any issues like disk space, CPU usage, memory problems, or backup failures.

In our evaluation of several monitoring options, we considered Datadog for application monitoring, the new version of Nagios, and NetData for network monitoring. We also explored a few other possibilities. Ultimately, Datadog, Auvik, and NetData emerged as the frontrunners, undergoing extensive testing and trials to determine if they met our requirements.

While ease of deployment was a key factor in choosing Auvik, it wasn't the only one. As a Canadian company, Auvik did hold a certain patriotic appeal, but ultimately, it came down to features and price. Datadog and NetData were significantly more expensive for a production environment. We ruled out Nagios because migrating our existing setup wasn't feasible, meaning a complete rebuild. Thankfully, Auvik's deployment took less than two hours.

I would rate Auvik Network Management ten out of ten.

Auvik has been a key tool for simplifying our platform monitoring. Its intuitive user interface allows for easy navigation between instances, minimizing training time for junior staff. We've reduced onboarding sessions from multiple sessions to just a half hour, making it significantly easier for our new technicians to get up to speed.

One of the key reasons we chose Auvik was because of its minimal maintenance requirements, which is perfect for our small team. Since it's cloud-hosted, the collectors automatically upgrade themselves, so we don't need to worry about keeping up with updates or ensuring we're on the latest version – that's all handled by Auvik.

In my experience, Auvik stands out for its ease of use, especially during the trial period. Setting up trials in custom environments can be difficult, but Auvik's worked flawlessly. Their support was readily available, and their pricing was competitive with good value. Overall, it's a top choice for managing IT infrastructure.

Our corporation, headquartered in Ohio, operates across 36 locations in the United States and Canada under various brand names. These locations fall under different business segments: Roto Molding (Washington, Colorado, Iowa, Indiana, Michigan, Ohio), Injection Molding and Plastics (Ohio, Missouri), Blow Molding (Oklahoma, Toronto), and Distribution (California, Utah, Texas, Central America, Massachusetts).

To manage this geographically dispersed network, we leverage Auvik. With a central data center in Atlanta and a backup in Houston, all locations are connected via SD-WAN. Auvik scans and tracks assets across all sites, notifying us of critical device outages, new device detections, configuration changes on network equipment (switches, routers, firewalls), and bandwidth or internet disruptions. Our main location acts as the master site, with individual locations as sub-sites. User access varies, with some having read-only privileges for specific segments and others having broader visibility. Importantly, during acquisitions, we deploy a new collector at the acquired site to scan their network before integration, allowing us to map their infrastructure before moving forward. With an active acquisition strategy of at least one per year, this process is crucial for seamless integration.

A standout feature of Auvik is its real-time network mapping. It provides a comprehensive overview but also allows for granular filtering. We can easily focus on specific elements, like only switches, their wireless access points, or even all wireless devices, making it an invaluable tool for network management.

The network map can get cluttered with information, but fortunately, it offers pre-filtered views and allows custom filtering as well. Many users might not be aware of this and might be struggling with the initial complexity. However, the ability to filter the view down to the most relevant details makes the overall functionality quite useful. I appreciate that the map provides a comprehensive view initially, while also empowering users to customize it for their needs.

The benefits of Auvik were clear from the start. Adding sites was a breeze, and the excellent training courses quickly got me up to speed. Since then, I've been using Auvik regularly, particularly to locate printers and conveniently connect to their web interfaces directly within the platform. It's a valuable tool for these tasks and more.

Auvik has significantly improved our mean time to resolution. Alerts ensure we're notified immediately of any downtime, and Auvik's centralized view of the network allows us to quickly diagnose issues. Furthermore, Auvik streamlines troubleshooting by enabling remote configuration of devices, saving valuable time in resolving problems.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on setup, maintenance, and issue resolution.

Auvik stands out for its user-friendly interface and its comprehensive configuration management features. I particularly appreciate the automated backup of configurations, centralized Syslog collection, and configuration comparison tool. This last feature allows us to easily see highlighted changes between previous and current configurations on switches, firewalls, and routers, which is invaluable for change management and understanding who made what modifications.

While Auvik excels in network management with a user-friendly interface, its customization and reporting features could benefit from improvement. Specifically, allowing more control over SNMP scans, like setting custom drive space alert thresholds instead of pre-defined values, would enhance flexibility. Similarly, the ability to tailor reports would be valuable. In contrast, PRTG shines in endpoint monitoring and alerting for servers due to its high level of customization. Lansweeper offers a wider range of reports, including custom and pre-configured options, making it a strong choice for detailed reporting needs. Overall, if Auvik could address these areas, it would solidify its position as a comprehensive network management solution.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

Auvik Network Management has been mostly reliable for us. While there have been a few outages, they haven't caused any major disruptions. My biggest concern was with occasional false positives, where devices were incorrectly identified as offline, then deleted and rediscovered. This caused some issues, but I recall receiving Auvik notifications about the problem, and it seems to be resolved now. Overall, things have been much smoother since then.

One of the key benefits of Auvik Network Management is its scalability. When we acquire a new site, setting up a collector and integrating it into the system is a breeze. Scanning and adding new sites is a smooth process. Currently, with two main collectors handling most of our locations, adding a third one seems unnecessary. However, as we continue to grow, strategically placing a third collector, potentially within the data center, might become beneficial.

The technical support team was both responsive and knowledgeable. While their answers on some of our tickets regarding server alert customization weren't always what we'd hoped for, it's understandable since this product isn't designed for server monitoring. After all, our billing isn't for network equipment. Overall, I was impressed with their support aside from these customization limitations.

Positive

Our IT toolset currently includes PRTG, Lansweeper, Wazuh, and Auvik. While consolidating everything into a single, unified solution might be ideal, we've discovered valuable functionalities within each of these existing tools. Therefore, we haven't replaced any and now manage four tools in total. Perhaps a single, all-encompassing tool will emerge in the future, but for now, this multi-tool approach is working effectively.

We realized the advantages of Auvik much quicker than with PRTG, Lansweeper, and Wazuh. This is due to Auvik's user-friendly interface, which is significantly easier to navigate than those of its competitors. While competing products offer greater customization, they are often more complex to set up and use. Auvik excels at guiding users, but this can come at the cost of some customization options. Once familiar with the software, customization in Auvik becomes slightly more challenging compared to some competitors, however, it remains the most user-friendly option.

The initial setup was straightforward and took a couple of months to complete. Five people from our end were involved with the deployment.

We worked with Auvik directly in the engagement team. And then our infrastructure team was primarily involved with getting it deployed.

Auvik's pricing structure is a perk. You only pay for the network devices you manage, like firewalls, routers, and switches. Computers, access points, and other devices Auvik scans are not billed. While their pricing aligns with competitors, the benefit of having these additional devices monitored for free makes Auvik a compelling option.

I would rate Auvik Network Management eight out of ten.

In addition to our participation in the beta program for endpoint monitoring which hasn't been a major focus yet, we're constantly on the lookout for a unified solution. Ideally, this unicorn product would offer everything we need – reporting, scanning detection, and alerting. Currently, we rely on a patchwork of tools like Auvik, PRTG, Lansweeper, and Wazuh. While consolidating everything into one solution might be wishful thinking, Auvik's feature set is particularly impressive, and we hope it might eventually encompass all our needs.

While our infrastructure division within IT restricts access to Auvik for entry-level technicians, we do provision read-only access to some other tools. For example, the information security department can view network maps and devices within these tools, which likely aids their visualization of our network connectivity. Overall, Auvik access is limited for most first-level technicians.

I use Auvik in a couple of ways. It is very good at keeping configuration files organized for us. We can review the changes to configuration files in our networking infrastructure equipment. It is also very good at creating maps and helping me visualize the troubleshooting of any infrastructure problems we have. 

By implementing Auvik Network Management, we were trying to get better visuals on our network and more transparency in our equipment because Auvik could talk to all of it. It was sort of agnostic. It did not require using a certain brand or anything. As long as you can SSH to it or terminal to it somehow, Auvik can read it.

At first, it was definitely just a new toy to play with, but I saw its benefits the first time we were trying to sort through an infrastructure problem with a Wi-Fi network that was older and having issues. We saw several warnings on several of our older switches. We would not have seen this stuff unless we had gone into these switches and read through these logs on our own, but Auvik was holding this data and giving us these warnings so that we could go in and sort out what was wrong.

It gives me all of my infrastructure points very well because I have programmed it to do so. In terms of individual endpoints or workstations for users, the visibility is not as excellent, but it is still good enough. We do not use the tool for that. For our purposes, it is a very clean interface.

Auvik has 100% helped to decrease our mean time to resolution. If I was not using Auvik to troubleshoot infrastructure problems, I would easily be adding another hour of work per problem or using another tool that was doing this. Everything is in one place, so I do not have to jump to different places to see the information. I can very easily filter through warnings and information.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on issue resolution but not on the setup and maintenance of the solution. Any time that we save allows us to do more research into something else that we are doing. There is always a value-add in shrinking troubleshooting time.

The interface is very good. I generally do not have any complaints about it. It takes me where I want to go and is easy to learn.

The dashboard is very easy to use if you set it up correctly at the beginning. We have it all labeled the way we want it to be labeled, and everything is quickly navigable. We can see all of our different locations. We can see any locations that have errors on our map so that we know exactly what to poke at and what to take a look at today. I have no complaints. With big networks, it does become cramped, but there are filters built into the map. I filter out the points I do not want displayed on the map, and then it is very readable.

There are a couple of items here and there that float around disconnected from the network map. That is annoying because they are defined as something that they are not. For example, I have a couple of workstations that it thinks are Wi-Fi access points, and it is a hard and tricky item to clean up. The cleanup or more granular functionality of the network map would be an interesting feature.

If there was a way to do some sort of remote desktop control for endpoints from Auvik, that would be an interesting feature because we have another product that we use for endpoint control to remote into somebody's computer. If Auvik had that, we might move from the other tool into the product that Auvik would offer. We already have that from Auvik to infrastructure devices, which is awesome, but if I could go one step further or one step down right to the workstation that has an issue, that would be a very interesting thing.

I have used it for at least three or four years.

It is better than it ever was. I feel like it was laggier when we first jumped on with Auvik, but over the last year, I have not even thought about any lag or stuttering.

It can be as big as it needs to be for us, but I am only familiar with how it is for us. It met our scale, and ours is medium.

The quality of support is very good. Everybody I have ever talked to in tech support over there or in training is very familiar with Auvik and very comfortable navigating people around it. They have a lot of confidence and capability. I am never disappointed in support.

Positive

For me, Auvik is pretty unique. I have not used many tools that:

• Create a map the way that Auvik does
• Have the configuration review that Auvik has
• Have SSH or terminal access to the tools that Auvik has

Auvik is all in one. I have used SNMP collectors and things but never had another tool like this.

It is deployed in the cloud. Its deployment was easy.

It was not very long to get it fully deployed. The training was longer than the deployment.

We had no consultant. It was Auvik and us.

You can set up Auvik with one person. As long as there is somebody from Auvik with you to do the training, you can set up the collectors yourself, for sure. 

In terms of maintenance, Auvik requires some review for the number of devices it is counting. We had an issue last year where we saw that Auvik was double-counting some of our devices, so we do have to audit the count to make sure that we are not being overcharged.

Auvik is expensive, but given how much we use it and how many hours it is saving over the year, it is justified.

There are no critical devices in our network that are monitored by Auvik at no charge. They are charging for everything. The first page you get to mentions how many devices you are paying for.

Auvik was our first choice because it fitted the use case that we wanted, which was the network control, and not a lot of things. When we started with Auvik, there were not a lot of solutions that offered that, or they were very expensive. Now we are staying with them because it is still good.

Pay attention during the training and definitely play with it after or during the training. Play with your release so that you can ask the questions that are relevant to your network.

We did a demo of SaaS Management with Auvik, and it was very interesting, but the price point was too high for us to justify the capabilities.

I would rate Auvik Network Management a nine out of ten because of the billing thing from last year where we were being double charged. That was disappointing to find out, but we have cleared it up now.