Auvik Network Management (ANM) Reviews

The use case of my experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM) was an upgrade for my network monitoring tool and the management of the network. It served as an upgrade for my company network and monitoring.

I appreciate the automatization of the dashboard monitoring, the automatic mapping of the network, and the easy deployment of the service. The interactive dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM) makes the work more productive and functions automatically. It is easier to work with the dashboard of Auvik Network Management (ANM). It is a significant advantage of Auvik Network Management (ANM) monitoring. I appreciate the personalization of alerts for the network, such as discovering traffic and the software for traffic analyzation. Auvik makes it easier to work with the network and makes my team more productive.

It would be beneficial if Auvik Network Management (ANM) made it possible to change or manipulate the interface, specifically the network interface of desktop devices.

I have less than a year of experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM), just a few weeks.

They have very good support for any trouble that I could have.

Positive

SolarWinds is provided to us from another provider's network service, a third party. The third party did not give us good SolarWinds service monitoring. We searched for a similar service and found Auvik Network Management (ANM), and after reviewing all their software and systems, we considered Auvik Network Management (ANM) to be much better than SolarWinds. However, the problem might be from the third party and not from SolarWinds. We are using SolarWinds for the moment but are considering Auvik Network Management (ANM) for a change. Because a third party gave us the SolarWinds monitoring, we cannot configure or maintain the service. We can only see the dashboard without any other options. I have used SolarWinds for five or six years.

The service is a bit expensive, but they can negotiate with us to make a better price for us.

Auvik Network Management (ANM) is not implemented in my company for now, but we had a demo. We do not have much experience with Auvik Network Management (ANM), but our first impression was very good. It is pretty easy to use the mapping tools. Everything is automatic, which is very comfortable for the work experience. I rate Auvik Network Management (ANM) eight out of ten.

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 use the solution pretty much for what it was designed for. We use it for network monitoring and its dashboards. 

We were trying to solve for visibility more than anything else. The monitoring we do is more preventative than remedial. In the time we've used it, we've migrated a lot. It's helping us more on the understanding and project management side rather than monitoring. 

The ease of setup is one of its most valuable aspects. 

The visibility and topology diagrams are great. The dashboarding is quite useful.

Its integration with ConnectWise has been the most beneficial for managing our network performance. 

Auvik is a bit of a capturing tool. For us, we can highlight the high-level elements and problems. Our network is relatively secure, so we haven't actually used it for alerting. However, it is there as a preventative and monitoring measure more than anything else. 

The interface is great once the configuration is done. 

We do get a real-time picture of our network. The visibility we get is around 95%, with the remaining 5% our fault, based on the way we're set up.

The solution has helped decrease our mean time to resolution. However, it varies, depending upon the severity, for example. It's reducing any networking tickets time to resolution somewhat. For example, we are moving some clients from one subnet to another, and in those circumstances, it's taking half the time for us to do that in a process way. 

If it's purely network monitoring, it's absolutely brilliant. It shows ups and downs, and provides a lot more information than you generally need. However, since we know it provides a lot more information, we use it for lots of different things.

It reduced our mean time to resolution by 20% to 30% across the board. 

For our second line, third line, our network teams, it has increased productivity and reduced time source solutions by about 10% to 15%. 

As with all SMP's monitoring tools, it's a little difficult to get exactly where it needs to be until you've completed your desktop.

We're a bit complicated as a use case as we've got data centers and clients. We're mixed management with multiple subnets. If the network was simpler, it would work perfectly. There are a couple of overlaps. Things could be clearer.

Things are easily confused if there are multiple data feeds. So, if we have a server with three of our network clouds, it won't necessarily get the hierarchy accurate. Being able to drag and influence them in the network map would make a lot more sense. Therefore, being able to influence the map manually and overwrite it or customize it would make a lot of sense.

I've been using the solution for about a year and a half. 

We have the solution in multiple locations, for example, in data centers, client sites, and offices. We don't have a huge amount of endpoints. We do have a cloud platform and use it to monitor that. Our clients are largely SMBs.

We've had no requirement to be in touch with support just yet. 

The only instance of reaching out was when we raised a query during the first time installation. It was a deployment query, and it resolved almost instantly. If we understood the solution a bit more, we could have solved the issue ourselves. 

There is good technical support documentation. There are elements that need to be kept up-to-date, however. They could refresh it a bit more. That said, it's not really a problem or enough to complain about. There are too many changes happening in the industry for any documentation to be perfect. 

Positive

We've used all kinds of solutions. We do have SolarWinds instances, for example, however, we don't tend to use them much. We've also used PRTG. Auvik is faster to set up.

The deployment was simple. We implemented it in half an hour. 

We did have a vendor assist us with the deployment process. 

While I couldn't quantify it at this time, we have definitely seen an ROI. 

It certainly helped out with one of the projects that we're involved with. Whilst we've had it for 18 months, we've really only embraced it over the last six and we won't really see figures from it until the end of next quarter.

We've likely saved five to six hours a week so far.

The solution is a little on the expensive side. That may be skewed for us since we use it more as a monitoring and preventative tool, and largely it's meant to be a remediation tool. While it is expensive, it's not so much so that it makes me want to switch.

We're an Auvik customer and partner. 

While the solution has not yet empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own, they will be able to soon. We're just moving across to utilizing more alerting and bespoke alerting. We're telling Auvik some of the things that we want to know and don't want to know. That is now starting to power the help desk. That change has been happening over the last week. So, by the end of this week, it will be.

I'd recommend the solution to others. Its ease of deployment and ability to provide basic information about a network, and monitoring basic information about a network, is actually very good. It puts things on the screen almost immediately. When alerts fire, it points to those alerts, and you can literally click through and find the problem almost instantly. The only negatives are around some things that you would expect. That said, overall, absolutely, I would recommend it. The peace of deployment and ease of information are worth it. It's very, very easy to understand. It's very, very easy to see where your problems are, and it's very, very easy to use that information to remediate the problems. However, for my advanced monitoring, it's a little more difficult to understand exactly where the information is coming from and how it's utilizing the information. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our network infrastructure is monitored by Auvik Network Management. This includes firewalls and network traffic. By using Auvik, we gain data and analytics that fuel our diagnostics, alarm systems, and overall network environment insights.

We decided to implement Auvik after struggling to find a network monitoring solution that ticked all the boxes. We needed a cost-effective option with a user-friendly interface, backed by a responsive company committed to ongoing product updates. Unfortunately, the market seemed to offer outdated, once-great products or solutions prohibitively expensive for small businesses and MSPs like us. Thankfully, our experience with Auvik has been good. Both our dedicated sales representative and the onboarding technical support team have been phenomenal.

Despite the usual setup time – an hour or two for getting things connected and entering credentials – the platform started pulling data from our devices almost immediately. It was practically instantaneous, aside from the standard management deployment time. Interestingly, the network map took a bit longer to figure itself out compared to the platform itself. The platform started showing me interface details, traffic information, and even automatically identified our WAN connections. We did have to set credentials later, and thankfully, we had backups of our devices ready beforehand, since it seemed like the platform wanted that information before the network map fully visualized everything. Overall, the deployment process was remarkably quick and easy.

Last Sunday, I encountered an issue that the dashboard interface helped resolve quickly. I could easily locate the specific device on the map and clicking on it brought up all relevant information. This allowed us to directly investigate the problematic port, view its traffic status up or down, without the need for a more cumbersome process. Traditionally, we would have had to VPN into the network, log in to the switch using its credentials, and then identify the specific port involved. The dashboard streamlines this process, saving time frequently. While it may not be a massive improvement, it offers a noticeable efficiency gain in our mean time to resolution.

Our company is still in the early stages of adopting Auvik, a monitoring platform that can be used for all of our customers. This means that we will eventually have one platform for all our alerts and for our technicians to access. This will simplify things internally for our company by reducing the number of platforms our technicians need to be familiar with to support our clients. It will also reduce the amount of documentation we need to maintain. With Auvik, our technicians will spend less time on maintenance and troubleshooting because they will only need to learn and use one platform. Currently, our technicians haven't started using Auvik yet, but the plan is to move away from all the various monitoring solutions we've been using for different customers and consolidate everything onto this one platform. Once our technicians are using Auvik, it will make our jobs significantly easier and faster.

Auvik stands out for its ability to combine network and per-port traffic inspection with log aggregation and data flow analysis in a single platform. This comprehensive approach is rare in network monitoring solutions. Even more impressive is that Auvik offers these high-end enterprise features at a cost-effective price. Traditionally, such capabilities are only found in expensive products. The combination of powerful features and affordability made Auvik a very attractive choice for us.

The Auvik interface has a modern look and feel in terms of its color scheme and layout. However, some elements are arranged in a way that I find counterintuitive. As a company with a web and application development team, we have a strong focus on user interface and user experience. For some features in Auvik, the placement of buttons and functionalities doesn't feel optimal. We've had to consult our representative several times on how to find specific options. For example, editing a device requires navigating through the sidebar to a specific category and tab, then selecting the device, line item, and checking a box before finally reaching the edit button. Additionally, the placement of buttons seems inconsistent across different sections, making the overall workflow less intuitive and requiring more training to become proficient.

My ideal real-time network monitoring would involve seeing all my data at once, including connection speeds and throughput. While Auvik's automated network map is visually appealing and generally accurate compared to competitors, it lacks some key features. For example, unlike a competitor's recent feature that shows traffic between trunk connections, Auvik only displays a single color for connection links, indicating wired or wireless status. This doesn't provide vital information like link speed or potential problems. Additionally, connections with momentary issues simply disappear from the map, which is frustrating. Auvik could integrate valuable alerts and insights from other parts of the platform directly onto the map. This would highlight potential issues with specific devices and their connections. While I acknowledge ongoing development efforts, there's still a significant gap in desired features. Another limitation is the lack of manual map editing. For instance, our server has multiple Ethernet connections entering a single switch, but the map erroneously shows them spread throughout the building. With no way to manually adjust this, the map's accuracy suffers. While Auvik's map is aesthetically pleasing, I wouldn't rely on it for complete accuracy.

I've had some trouble using Auvik's device proxy, which allows technicians to connect to network devices through Auvik's platform. The Mac software I need isn't fully functional yet, so I might be doing something wrong, but other products like Domotz work flawlessly. One of the main reasons we chose Auvik was to eliminate the need for VPNs, on-site PCs, or network tunnels for technicians to access devices. This would reduce our equipment costs. While the pricing is fair overall, the jump between plans is significant. For instance, their higher plan offers features like NetFlow statistics and analytics for firewalls, which require more data and rightfully cost more. However, the entire client site is included in that plan, and there's no option to pay extra for specific devices. I'd be happy to pay more for those features on select devices, but the current pricing structure prevents me from getting them. This seems like a missed opportunity for both Auvik and us. Not all my devices need the extensive logging and data collection offered in the higher plan. Network switches and access points, for example, have their own controllers that handle SysLogging, so I wouldn't need Auvik for that. However, I would like to pay extra for those features on our firewalls and routers. In the current situation, neither side benefits. If we pay for the higher plan, our costs increases, which will eventually impact our customers' prices. However, convincing customers to pay for this one additional feature within the entire monitoring platform is difficult.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for one year.

Throughout this process, I've primarily relied on my representative for assistance. While I haven't directly contacted their technical support line, my representative has involved them on my behalf. This may be a slight deviation from the usual procedure, but it has still allowed me to reach the appropriate people.

The technical support team has been very responsive in identifying and resolving any technical issues I've encountered. They were able to quickly understand the situation with minimal questions. Additionally, I appreciate the granular control I have over their access to client data. I can grant them temporary or read-only access, which allows for collaborative troubleshooting without compromising security or hindering our learning experience.

Overall, I've been very impressed with the technical support team's knowledge. We understand they aren't responsible for diagnosing internal network issues; their focus is on supporting their platform and ensuring our connection to network devices. So far, their responsiveness has been excellent.

Prior to implementing Auvik, we experimented with a number of network management solutions. These included PRTG, Domotz, LibreNMS, and the built-in NinjaOne option. We also evaluated SolarWinds. We've explored a wide range of options. Our goal is to find a standardized solution, and we believe Auvik fits the bill. PRTG was expensive so we could only use the free version that only allowed for 1,000 sensors, proving too restrictive for our needs. LibreNMS required a high level of technical expertise for deployment and maintenance, which wasn't feasible for all our technicians. SolarWinds simply didn't meet all our requirements. While NinjaOne is still in active development. We may revisit it in the future. Overall, Auvik strikes the perfect balance between functionality, ease of use, and scalability.

The deployment of Auvik requires installing an agent and some information. The deployment took around one hour. 

Although Auvik is a cloud-based solution, it requires software installation on a computer or server within our network. This initial process can be cumbersome. In our experience, the provided API key wasn't functional, and creating separate API keys isn't an option. Instead, we need to create full user accounts, which feels unnecessarily complex.

Once the connector is installed, the user interface presents challenges. Management credentials and network scanning configurations are located in separate areas. While the deployment section attempts to consolidate these settings, it becomes irrelevant after the initial setup. Ideally, the interface should streamline the initial configuration process, instead of requiring users to navigate through various menus.

Another concern is the requirement for generic credentials. Instead of specifying credentials for each device, we must provide generic ones that are simply tested for functionality. This raises security concerns. These generic credentials are tested against various devices in our environment, even those for which they are not intended. While we trust our security measures, a compromised device could potentially allow the Auvik connector to expose these credentials to unauthorized devices. Ideally, the system should allow for specifying credentials on a per-device basis, eliminating the need for generic credentials and the associated security risks.

The implementation was completed in-house.

I came to a surprising realization about Auvik's pricing. It turns out they only charge for routers and switches! This means all our access points, security cameras, camera servers, and other infrastructure are monitored for free. While the client understandably wanted the server on-site, most other devices are a bonus. This is a huge advantage – with a typical network, we might have one firewall, three switches, and 60-70 access points. With Auvik, we only pay for the four core devices, bringing the cost down significantly. In my opinion, Auvik could advertise this benefit more clearly. Many other platforms charge for every device, so Auvik's free monitoring for a large portion of the network is a game-changer. It not only helped us make the decision but also benefits non-profits we support. The fact that they're confident enough in their platform to offer this makes Auvik a truly valuable and supportive solution.

In the end, we were deciding between Domotz and Auvik. Auvik's initial pricing structure was a concern. Their tiered system required a minimum number of devices per tier to get a reasonable price. While their desire to be profitable is understandable, this presented a hurdle for us. However, Auvik impressed us with their willingness to work with us. They emphasized that they wouldn't lose a customer solely on price, as long as open communication existed. This flexibility in finding a solution was a major factor in our decision. Another reason we chose Auvik was the user interface and user experience. We found Auvik's interface to be superior to Domotz's. Additionally, Auvik's pricing based on individual devices, rather than NetFlow, was a significant advantage. This meant we wouldn't be penalized for devices with minimal traffic or high port counts. From a business standpoint, this eliminated the need to constantly monitor billing for small variations in device usage. With Auvik, we pay a fixed cost per device and receive all the necessary features, regardless of its size or complexity. Consistent and predictable billing was another key consideration in our choice.

Auvik Network Management gets a solid eight out of ten from me. While the network maps and user interface could be improved, the software delivers exactly what we need out of the box. It connected to our devices seamlessly and provided valuable analytics data and information logging. The setup process was straightforward, and the learning curve wasn't steep.

We're currently in the early stages of implementing Auvik, which means our existing software is still operational. To ensure a smooth transition, we typically allow a three-to-four-month overlap period for new software before fully integrating it into production. While I've been the primary user so far and can provide initial insights, our help desk technicians haven't yet been granted access to Auvik.

There is a minimal amount of maintenance required, primarily for alerts. The default settings include alerts for all devices, but not all of them are relevant to our needs. We simply need to adjust these defaults. Aside from that, the system is truly "set it and forget it." It will notify us of any problems, and as an IT company, we have internal procedures to log in and investigate any alerts. However, there is no ongoing maintenance required after the initial installation.

Setting up Auvik is smoothest when your network devices are already configured for SNMP. If you're unsure about your equipment's SNMP settings or lack a configuration altogether, take some time to familiarize yourself with your devices before proceeding. Having your device credentials readily available will also expedite the process. As long as both SNMP logging and credentials are prepared, Auvik deployment becomes a breeze. However, investing a few minutes to learn the Auvik interface beforehand will pay off in the long run. A grasp of the interface will make Auvik exceptionally user-friendly and position it as a powerful and functional solution for your needs.

We are an MSP. We use Auvik to monitor our customers and to get up/down tickets. We get alerts from the SIEM, so we use it to make sure where those clients are in the SIEM. If we get an alert that something is sending 5 gigs, we can use it to make sure it is on the network or not on the network. We use it for alerts as well. That is mainly about it. We also give network maps to the customers to use.

A lot of our clients want compliance. There is active monitoring of the system, and it is just easier to get a network map. It is easier to see all the clients that are on the network. If somebody needs to know who is using the x subnet, we can search for it and send it off to them. It is pretty easy in that respect for most of our customers.

Auvik Network Management makes it a little bit easier to troubleshoot network issues. If we get an alert saying that there is a high interface usage, or something is very high, I can click right on the switch and look at it. I can see which port is being utilized. I can see the total utilization on the switch. If I need to, I can terminal into it and turn it off or turn it on.

Auvik's network map along with its dashboard gives us a close to real-time picture of our network. It is not in real-time. It is close enough to real-time. If I want to see how much traffic is going from all the clients to the server over the course of a day, I can see that. However, if I want to see a broadcast storm or if we accidentally created a loop or something, it gives me the tools to find it, but it does not explicitly tell me that we created a loop. In terms of visibility, if I click around, I can get about 90% visibility for investigating things.

We have been able to more quickly identify issues in the network. We did not do documentation on clients before. It is now easier for us to get the documentation done because we can see that there is a switch here and there is a switch there, and get it done. For new clients, I can plug it in and put it in the network. I do not have to walk everywhere. These are the nice, immediate, and tangible benefits that we saw.

Auvik Network Management has helped to decrease our mean time to resolution, but it is hard to quantify the time savings. Sometimes, you have to dig in. It at least cuts 30 to 45 minutes off of getting into the server, logging into the switches, pulling all the switches up, etc. I can click from one to one to one.

I like the quick mapping. I can put a customer in, and I can put the Auvik monitor in, and then probably within about half an hour to an hour, I can see most of the map. I have to tweak things here and there with the switches to get it to read correctly for credentials, but it is very quick. I can see the network pretty quickly.

There are a few things I would like to change about the interface, but in general, compared to a lot of other products, it is a little easier to use. It is a little hard sometimes to find MAC addresses and a couple of other things without getting a couple of clicks in, but in general, usability-wise, it is better than the ones we tried.

I would like more customizable alerts. I can put all the firewalls. I can put all the switches. However, especially with our firewalls, I would like to create an SNMP alert when there has been a change on the firewall, such as a rule change or a configuration change. We want to use it as a part of change management, but we cannot because we cannot get alerts. The alerts are basically whatever Auvik has. We cannot create or at least submit a ticket to get a customized alert, so we have to rely on our SIEM instead to do that alert. It took months. We had to get them to create it for us. That would be one thing I would like to see. There should be more customizable alerts or an easier and more accessible way to get customized alerts in some fashion. We really need those alerts. Otherwise, it mostly works for us.

It would also be nice to be able to customize some parts of the interface so that we have the information that is most important to us, and we could display that in some way.

Overall, there should be more customizability. It does what it does, but trying to change anything about it is a little difficult. We would save more time if we could put certain things on the front dashboard and are able to pull it up and go, "I want the switch and the firewall monitored on these ports." If I am trying to do some testing, I should be able to just put them there on Auvik and pin them instead of having to go to each one of them individually.

It has been about a year and a half.

It is definitely stable. We do not have too many crazy outages or anything like that. The platform is pretty stable. I would rate it a nine out of ten for stability.

It is pretty scalable. It could get a little dicey, but it is not on the Auvik's side. It depends on the implementation. I would rate it an eight out of ten for scalability.

We have ten people who work with Auvik. Our clients are mostly medium-sized organizations. We have about a dozen or so large enterprises, and we have about 300 medium-sized organizations and another 300 small-sized ones. 

I never had to call them. My colleague did call support to talk about the alerts. They did answer pretty quickly, and we were pretty quick to tell them no. They were helpful and quick the one time we called them. We do not really call them.

The documentation that they provide is pretty good. The deployment information is pretty detailed. They have the options for Linux, Windows, and even Unix. I do appreciate that. It is pretty good.

We used Domotz for a while, and we then switched to Auvik. We ran into similar problems, but the dashboard of Domotz was not as accessible as Auvik.

We also used Observium. It is an open-source one. Observium did everything we wanted to do, but it was way too in-depth. It is an actual open-source developer one, so it is not easily accessible to the average person. We used Observium for a brief period.

The time to value of Auvik is not very long. The platform is pretty quick. There are good instructions online. It was almost immediately.

I am pretty sure it is all on-prem. At least I have not deployed one that was in the cloud.

The deployment is pretty straightforward. It is super easy. The instructions online are usually pretty good. I do not have any problems with it. It is pretty easy and straightforward.

For small customers, it takes a couple of hours. For large customers, with ten switches and a couple of firewalls, it can take four or five hours. Auvik itself usually takes 20 minutes. If we have access to the server, we can just boot up Windows or Linux, and it is done.

In terms of maintenance, we do get alerts when the collectors go offline. Sometimes, they just fall out, and sometimes, the network does some weird things. There is a small amount of maintenance but nothing crazy.

We have definitely seen an ROI in terms of time to resolution and time to work on things. It has definitely shown value in that sense. It has saved us about half an hour on a ticket. We get about 30 tickets a year per client. That saves us 15 hours over the course of a year, which is 3,000 to 4,000 dollars.

Auvik allows us to spend less time on the setup and maintenance of the solution and issue resolution.

Relative to others, it is affordable. It is not terrible. The Performance licensing is a little expensive for what you get, but the standard licensing is fine.

Observium was free. It is open source, so you cannot beat that. It is open source, so it is free. 

Domotz is probably a little more expensive. I never got into that because that was a little bit before me. I used it a little bit but did not get into the pricing structure too much. It seems pretty comparable.

Technically, there are critical devices that are monitored by Auvik at no charge. We have to pay for servers. We have to pay for network devices and firewalls. We do have some PCs that we want to make sure do not go down. This free monitoring is nice. It does not add too much value. We want to see the workstations and where they are at. It would be weird to be charged for that.

It definitely does what it is supposed to do and what it is advertised to do. If people want to use it, it would be fine. For MSPs, it works great because the pricing structure is pretty good, but singular individual or giant enterprises would probably go with an in-house solution, such as Observium, for some of the alerting. In general, for MSPs, it is great. The pricing structure is great, and it is definitely usable.

Auvik has not empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets on their own because we do not give it to our entry-level technicians. In our case, it is specifically for our network team. Our entry-level technicians do not handle any of the network. It is something we want to do with them, but as of now, our entry-level technicians do not use it.

Overall, I would rate Auvik Network Management an eight out of ten. Customizable alerts would be good. It would also be nice to be able to customize some parts of the interface. There should be more customizability. 

We use Auvik for network troubleshooting and monitoring.

We needed more visibility into the networks we manage. Auvik's automatic network mapping was something that helped us visualize the Management Network. The benefits were immediate. We quickly identified a few problems and resolved them quickly. For example, some links were slower than expected, and we remedied those issues fast.  Without, Auvik we would need to spend more time troubleshooting.

Auvik has helped our junior technicians solve more tickets. We've encouraged them to use Auvik, which enables them to navigate a network visually. I think they would have trouble without that visualization. 

Auvik's visual mapping and search features have been very useful. We can locate precisely where each device is on the map. The network map provides a real-time picture of the network that offers total visibility. 

The interface is good, but it can be sluggish and difficult to use on a small screen. I usually need a large screen to navigate it when monitoring more complex networks.

Also, the points on the network map will sometimes shift. They will be connected one way, but they will be connected a different way after I refresh. This doesn't happen often, but when it does, I question the reliability of our network map. 

We have used Auvik for nearly two years.

I've never seen Auvik crash, so I think it's 100 percent stable.

Auvik scales to where we need it to be, so it's perfectly scalable.

I rate Auvik's support seven out of 10. We contacted them about an issue with the mapping. The problem was complex, so it took a while to resolve.

Neutral

Before Auvik, we had another tool that was difficult to implement, so it wasn't deployed in many places. We also used UniFi's built-in network mapping, but that requires you to use only UniFi hardware. Auvik can integrate multiple vendors and do the same thing across the board.

Deploying Auvik was straightforward. It has an agent and uses SMP for the devices. We already had SMP enabled, so it was easy. We did it in-house, and it took about two months to fully deploy. About eight people were involved, including Auvik's support. It doesn't require any maintenance aside from onboarding devices. 

Auvik's pricing is decent. I forget exactly how much we pay, but we've never been dissatisfied with the value we get from this. The licensing model is palatable to us. I haven't looked at the licensing too closely, but I believe Auvik only charges for some devices, not based on the number of endpoints at each site. 

They also have an add-on product called SaaS Management. We did a demo but didn't purchase it.  While it's useful, I think there are too many drawbacks. We thought it was a little expensive and didn't feel we could get enough value from it to justify it. It was interesting but somewhat invasive and a tough sell to our customers. Considering the potential invasiveness and price, we decided not to deploy it. 

I rate Auvik eight out of 10. Auvik has a very short learning curve, so you can jump in and start using it.

We use Auvik Network Management to monitor the environment, anything connected to the network, access points, switches, firewalls, and absolutely everything that lives in the Network. We also use it to set up alerts, which is the biggest use case. So whenever something goes down, we can set up Auvik to send pings to anything to monitor the behavior.

We had some customers that whenever something went down, such as any appliance or server going offline, we did not have something in place to let us know that the platform or device was offline. So, the main goal of implementing Auvik was to be able to set up alerts and monitor everything that we can. It is mostly network-related, but we also use it for items like servers, appliances, computers, and anything we can.

Auvik provides an intuitive interface that supports ease of use. It helps me rectify issues. The platform first identifies whenever something is down, malfunctioning, or lost connection. Auvik also helps us get the information for whatever went down, like serial numbers, makes, models, or anything else, so that we can get that as well. And we can also monitor the life of the devices. So once something goes on, we are aware of it right away, and we can make changes or anything that we need right away. When something comes up again, we can take immediate action.

Auvik's network map and dashboards provide a real-time picture of our network. When we have difficulties gaining real-time network visibility, we lack the necessary credentials. With the proper credentials, it is easy to map the entire network using Auvik. It is an intuitive platform. It's not that complicated to learn how to use it. Of course, it has a lot of features. However, once we have some knowledge, which is something we like because sometimes we hire tier-one people with no or little experience. The good thing is that people without experience can learn quickly how to use Auvik because it's not complicated.

We have customers whose priority is keeping the network up and running. When we have the first conversations with them, when we try to onboard a customer, one of the most important things for them is that we can monitor the network so that we can make sure that their users are working and will continue working without any downtime. That is important to a lot of our customers. So when we offer our services, one of the best things that we offer is that, and that is thanks to Auvik because that's the tool that we use. Auvik has helped us improve what we offer our customers, and they like how it works.

Auvik has empowered our entry-level technicians to solve more tickets independently. Because the portal is frequently used, our tier ones can familiarize themselves easily. They see how to monitor and troubleshoot. Auvik offers good training and certification, which we then offer to our employees.

For customers who don't have Auvik, the resolution time is one or two hours. But for customers with Auvik, it comes down to 20 to 30 minutes.

Auvik has saved our technicians around 30 hours per week.

Auvik allows us to spend less time setting up and maintaining the solution and more time resolving issues. It also allows us to identify the issue rapidly.

Auviks' automation capabilities assist us in automating the alerts that come through. They come through a ticketing system, and we set up automatic responses. So whenever an alert comes from x company, it automatically emails all contact points. It comes to me. It goes to any personal interest that needs to be aware of the situation in the company. It helps us automate the alert process so we are aware of an issue and can work on it.

Auvik has enhanced our network security and response time to network issues. 

I find Auvik's intuitive interface a welcome change from the complex network management platforms I've used. The platform's ease of use and extensive customization options for alert triggers are valuable features.

I know there's a way to use Auvik with machines instead of a computer with the agent. There's a way that we could use machines on the location. I want to add those options to improve Auvik because its offers are slightly more limited. So, for example, in our case, we use Auvik by installing the agent on my computer and then connecting that computer to the network at our client's offices. And there's another way where the client does not want to pay for a computer and does not have that network for us to connect. There's another agent option that Auvik offers, which uses the computers that are on the location as the agent. But the options we have there are limited to what we can do and see, so if it's possible to improve that a little bit, that will be good.

If such functionality is supported, it would be beneficial to leverage Auvik's capabilities to monitor Group Policy Objects on our servers.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for two years.

Auvik is stable. We have not had any unexpected outages. They also keep their customers informed by providing advance notice for any planned maintenance.

I would rate the scalability of Auvik Network Management ten out of ten.

While Auvik's technical support has been generally good, there have been a few instances where resolution times were longer than ideal.

Positive

In my previous role, I worked with several products, including Datto, ManageEngine, and Datadog. ManageEngine was particularly challenging due to its lack of user-friendliness. New hires consistently struggled to navigate the platform, requiring extensive training. Thankfully, this isn't the case with Auvik. Additionally, Datto and Datadog offered subpar support and documentation, making troubleshooting difficult. Reliable support and clear documentation are crucial for our team and heavily influence our software selections.

The deployment is straightforward and takes 30 minutes to set up, create the site, and deploy Auvik. One person is enough to deploy Auvik.

Auvik saves our technicians hours of work. When technicians had to spend an hour and a half or two hours solving an issue, they could now solve it faster with Auvik. So, ticket resolution time goes down. That improves our customer service and satisfaction, and the technicians do not spend an extra hour doing that.

The price for Auvik is affordable.

I would rate Auvik Network Management nine out of ten.

We have a team that monitors the Auvik alerts.

We have around 25 people in our organization that have access to Auvik.

Our clients range from small to enterprise level and vary in industry.

No maintenance is required for Auvik.

I strongly recommend Auvik for network management. To get the most out of it, ensure you have all device credentials beforehand, including access points and switches. While I'd love to offer it to all clients for free, the benefits - including reduced workload for myself and my team - make it a worthwhile investment, even if there's a cost involved.

I originally purchased Auvik to assist in troubleshooting network issues on the local area network and wide area network. We were having some slowness issues, but they were only in certain segments of the network. I had no tools on-site to help me find where the problem was.

I was able to realize the benefits of Auvik Network Management immediately. I knew I was having network problems. I got it up and running in a day, and I was immediately able to seewhere my issues were.

It does not cover everything I need, but a part of that is because I have not implemented Auvik 100%. I got Auvik up and running far enough to do my troubleshooting, and I then left it while I worked on other major projects. So I still have a lot to learn. I am taking all their classes, and I learn more in every class. My frequent comment is that it is like drinking from a fire hose, but

Auvik is putting the classes online so I can then go back and run it again, open up my Auvik and go through the items covered in class. Going through those training sessions has helped me configure Auvik.

I am 90% positive and 10% negative about its user interface. Most of the time, it is very intuitive, and I can find what I am looking for, but sometimes, it is a struggle. What is awesome is that during the training sessions, the instructors always end with Q&A, and you can ask any question. You do not have to ask a question just about what the training was on. They answer your question, and they always lead me to where I need to be on the interface.

The network map is currently giving me partial visibility. I do not have visibility to my portal to the Internet, but that is partly because I do not have it configured and partly because I am not sure if I want to allow that password access to my firewall.

The network map along with the dashboard gives a real-time picture of your network, but my network map is still messy. I am not sure if it is because it does not have all the permissions yet to do everything it wants to. About half of my devices are stranded in the middle of nowhere, and the other half are connected through multiple connections. A part of that is that Auvik does not have the Ubiquiti stuff down yet, so they do not really know which devices are talking to each other, but it is enough. Especially with the connectors, I can see what device is talking and figure out where my bottlenecks are. It is nowhere near perfect. When they give their training sessions, their network map is beautiful. Mine is pretty chaotic.

Auvik Network Management decreased the mean time to resolution for the initial problem I had.

So far, I have used it only for one initial problem. It helped with that problem.

I like the way that Auvik auto-configures itself to do the mapping. I wish it was a little more accurate, but as soon as you start getting your authentication correct for the different protocols that Auvik uses for discovery, it starts putting together your map for you.

It is not backing up my configurations on much of my network equipment. For some reason, it struggles with Ubiquiti equipment, and it is a known issue. They have a ticket open for it. Some of the issue could be the way Ubiquiti handles authentication. Ubiquiti handles authentication differently. Auvik expects to be able to log in to a device and then go into Config mode, whereas you are already in Config mode when you log into a Ubiquiti device. There is no additional authentication required, so they are having difficulties getting their scripts working on Ubiquiti.

The piece that I would like to see the most is getting those configs backed up. That is my chief complaint. If Auvik can get that work, they would be perfect.

I have been using Auvik Network Management for about seven months.

I contacted Auvik about how often they were down, and their response was they had not been down. They have just been doing maintenance that temporarily takes the system away, so it is not 100% stable yet. It does seem to go down a couple of times a month, but it is never down for long. Usually, they are fixed quite quickly.

We have just a single site with a couple hundred devices. I know that they have very large customers' data centers, so I am assuming that Auvik scales well. 

I am the sole IT person for this facility. It is a school for the intellectually disabled. We are a live-in facility 24/7 and 365 days. I have 300 students and about a hundred staff. I provide support for over an 850-acre campus.

We have just a single site with a couple hundred devices. I know that they have very large customers' data centers, so I am assuming that Auvik scales well. 

I am the sole IT person for this facility. It is a school for the intellectually disabled. We are a live-in facility 24/7 and 365 days. I have 300 students and about a hundred staff. I provide support for over an 850-acre campus.

Positive

I used PRTG. PRTG proved to be too complicated for one person to set up and use. It took too much care in feeding. Auvik is definitely better.

It is a hybrid setup. I have a collector on-site, but all the actual work is done in the cloud.

Its deployment was pretty easy. 

The only additional maintenance is if any equipment comes online and it does not recognize the equipment, you have to go into Discovery and give it the appropriate username and password.

That is the only maintenance required.

I deployed it myself.

The school I work for was founded in 1893 by a private family. It is still run by that same family, and that family dislikes the subscription model. They much prefer to buy equipment and own it, so trying to convince management to use a subscription model for a piece of software was pretty difficult. However, I was able to get Auvik to present it more as a multi-year contract instead of a subscription model. It is something their sales can do for other customers, but I do not think it is something they advertise.

For the size of our school, it is expensive, but I understand the reason behind the pricing. All my servers in the network are monitored by Auvik at no charge. We are only paying for network devices, so I pay for switches, access points, and firewalls, but I do not pay for all my user PCs and MACs, and my servers, which are my critical devices.

You need to understand the permissions required by your different pieces of hardware, especiallyfor different hardware types such as Windows, VMware, your networking hardware, and your Internet interface. You need to have all the permissions ready so that you can set up your Discovery. The hardest thing to get running on Auvik is getting the Discovery set up properly.

Overall, I would rate Auvik Network Management an eight out of ten.