Nagios XI Reviews

We use the solution in order to collect large amounts of data to monitor our network, switches, and firewall.

It provides an easy and powerful solution to network monitoring so I can pay attention to other concerns.

The most valuable feature is the setup wizard. The wizard just asks you for simple details and automatically starts collecting logs. It will give you some hints to configure your login on remote devices.

For enterprise users, the product would be better if it came with dedicated plugins. It has an online store for plugins and additional features, but most of the plugins we have are mostly open source. These open source plugins do not have a lot of documentation. We have to try to figure out how to use them on our own. They have good documentation for their own products and because of that, we have details to easily use their product as they have a guide. There is no documentation on the plugin site. They need more documentation for the plugins.

Besides that, there's nothing more that I would add as the product covers my current needs. Maybe I would like a lower price. That is maybe a problem they could fix.

We have absolutely no problem with the stability of the solution. I have no problem with the system or the setup. I want to do more to master the system and harness its capability, but that is my limitation.

Technical support is very good but is very expensive. It is becoming more and more expensive just like the upgrade. The incredibly high prices are a very bad move on their part. I know everything is got to go up but this seems too much at a time. They also have some requirements for the support licensing that is very complicated. You have to have a password and you pay for a limited number of calls. For the price they are selling it, It should be okay to call them anytime.

The setup was very straightforward. We did not have to create a complicated strategy. We just installed the server and add the devices that were most urgent for me to monitor. I just added the devices and it was as simple as that.

We implemented it on our own in a very short period of time.

The license and support are very expensive. You pay separately for each and the licensing is a little complicated. With a company like Cisco which may be expensive, the support is included. This product costs more than even Cisco. The support is not as easy to contact.

It is hard not to consider other solutions now because of the advice of other CIOs and their experience with open source products that save them a lot of money. It may not always save time because they can be more difficult to use. That can be a trade-off.

The price of the licensing is very high, even for a big company. There are good open source products in the market that we could use for free and other companies I know are using them because of the price. Mostly because of the price of the product and the cost of tech support, I would rate this an eight out of ten. The product itself is very good.

We use this solution for the monitoring of network devices in multiple areas. I use this solution on a daily basis, and the first thing that I do when I go into the workplace each morning is to check on all of the equipment.

This solution has improved our ability to determine the source of a connection failure in our network. Prior to using Nagios XI, we did not know whether the drop in service was a result of our system, or whether it was the fault of our service provider. Now, we are able to monitor the service provider's router and make that determination.

The most valuable feature is its support for different types of devices, where it can use all of the equipment that you need. You can find and change your speed in the network topology, and if something goes down then it will be noticed immediately.

I would like to see more customization in the network map because it is a bit tricky to use it.

First, when you click on one of the devices on the map, it shows you information about the equipment. Sometimes, there is information that I do not want to show. I would instead like to choose what is shown.

Next, I would like to have the ability to show only a subset of equipment on the network map. When you view it, all of the equipment that you have is there, every time. Sometimes, I would like to choose just a group of devices to view.

This is a stable solution. On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the stability a nine.

The scalability is perfect. I can add as much equipment as I like.

I have not needed to contact technical support. Everything installed easily and it works fine.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

The initial setup is very straightforward.

The deployment took approximately one hour. The difficult part is configuring the equipment, such as setting up the IP addresses. Because I have more than fifty devices, it took me some time. The task is simple, albeit repetitive.

The licensing fees for this solution are approximately $3,000 USD per year.

When I was researching solutions I read about Nagios XI, and it was rated as one of the best solutions. I tried it and I liked it, which is why it was selected.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

This solution is being used to monitor hundreds of servers at startup. It checks disk usage, services, memory usage, and more.  

It has improved the task of network monitoring.

The most valuable feature is the dashboard, where I can have a single screen that provides a summary for hundreds of servers. I get red and green indicators that help me to quickly check for and rectify problems.

When you monitor a lot of things it creates a lot of events and logs. I would like a much easier GUI so that I can delete events and logs, which will free up a lot of space. I would also like a better GUI for dashboard viewing.

A better interface would allow this solution to be used as a single point of monitoring.

When the database is in need of repair, perhaps due to corruption caused by an improper shutdown, then it should happen automatically, rather than having to run a command.

The stability of this solution is quite good.

If the machine crashes and it goes down, without properly shutting down the virtual machine, then I get an error that requires the database to be repaired.

There are four or five people that browse the dashboard.

I dealt with technical support for a few months, but because I do not have a support contract I have not used it in several years. A support contract can be purchased separately.

If problems arise then you are able to fix things on your own. If you can't, then just leave it.

I am also using KS-Soft Advanced HostMonitor, but only for monitoring the up or down status of the machines. It has a much better icon view of the dashboard. When our customer wants to look at their data center and see the status of all branches and all servers, it shows a much better, color-coded graphical form. I am in the process of purchasing additional licenses for HostMonitor so that I can have multiple dashboards running from a single machine.

I did not switch solutions, but I am always open to products that offer a better user interface.

The initial setup for this solution is quite easy. I am running it on a VM platform.

The deployment happens over time as the environment changes, but the initial deployment took one or two days. For the server to monitor, you just have to set the SNMP and add it onto the Nagios platform. As more servers are added, you add them to the platform.

We took care of the implementation in-house. One person is sufficient for deployment and maintenance.

This solution is very expensive, at approximately $5,000 USD when I purchased it, which is why I haven't upgraded my version in several years.

I am using the original version of the software that I purchased because I do not have a support contract. This means that I have not received support or updates in several years.

While this solution works, I think that it can be improved in terms of maintenance, support, and price.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

We use this solution for monitoring the status of our hard drives, as well as bandwidth utilization. Essentially, we monitor all of the necessary statuses for our servers.

This solution is very good for monitoring infrastructure. It is simply to use, and you can receive notifications by email.

This solution would be improved with the inclusion of additional services. Monitoring streaming services is an example of something that is not currently supported, so in order to handle this, I would have to write a script. Scripts like this should be included in the next version of the solution.

I would like to see support for notification via SMS. 

The solution is very stable, although sometimes we have had problems with the database in cases where we had a large number of roles and services. There have been cases of database corruption that had to be repaired.

Scalability is very good, and I have no problem with it. The configuration is such that you can add hosts or monitoring services very easily.

We have four security administrators who use this system.

I have not needed to contact technical support. There are webinars and other information available that I have made use of. If you have a problem then you can copy and paste the error into a search engine and find the solution easily.

I have used other solutions from vendors such as McAfee, but Nagios XI is the best solution when compared with others.

I feel that the initial setup is difficult for a beginner. You must be skilled at using the Linux operating system to install and start up the solution.

I performed the installation myself, learning about it from a webinar that was available online.

I am in the process of testing a large number of solutions, and this is the best one.

This is a very good solution and it is simple to use, for any company. It is also very stable and you can monitor a large number of services with no problem. You can also create many users and have them receive notification by email. It's very good.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are planning to use this solution for network server monitoring. We have had training for deployment on our end, but it is not yet in production use.

The most valuable feature is the monitoring of processes.

I think that the process of installing this solution can be improved because it is quite hectic.

The interface could be more user-friendly.

I think that stability is quite good. 

We are still in the pre-production stage and have only two IT administrators using the solution. There will be six users once it moves to production.

We have not been in contact with technical support.

We are currently using Zabbix.

The installation of this solution is a bit complex, and it requires that you are running it fully.

One of the issues that we experienced was getting the source to a computer where we could deploy it. That took some time.

We are handling the implementation in-house. There are two of us who took care of the pre-production deployment and will continue with the implementation.

We are using the free version of this solution.

We are testing out this solution in addition to Zabbix.

We will soon be moving this solution into production. However, it is a bit complex and difficult for a first-time user.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

For monitoring HFC network from the headend to end-of-line, mainly power supplies (transponders).

Integrating events and performance data between multi-vendor network elements and management systems.

All of them, but mainly: 

• Highly-efficient server performance monitoring engine
• Configuration wizards
• Infrastructure management
• Configuration snapshot.

• Developing a tool for KPIs and KQIs
• WebUI should be improved (visual aspect) and should incorporate non-relational databases.

BPI: It allows defining peripherals to map business criticality for efficient monitoring, as required.

Allows for monitoring of all the different portfolios in an infrastructure, as well as the application/databases.

The product uses the backend as Perl and could be modified to a more lightweight solution like what's being offered by other vendors.

Three to four years.

If you are monitoring network devices, often it's not scaled for large corporations. Definitely, a minus in that area.

Not an issue, but more of adding additional nodes to handle a large number of devices.

It's based on a forum. It allows us to get help from support as well as from other clients who may have knowledge.

Cost was a big factor, but also compatibility of various legacy OSs which still can be managed by Nagios far better than anyone else as an open source.

Defining the requirements are always a given until you get a hang of the product, and we were no exception.

Definitely if some of the complexity and shortcomings are addressed, it has great potential for being a market leader. The open source version could be better incorporated with the general convention similar to Fedora going into Red Hat.

HPE Operations Manager.

Plan ahead based on your infrastructure and application as it would apply to all segments.

Network monitoring and topology: Network monitoring and topology are important for my job rules, because I'm a system and network administrator. I need to have information in real-time about the topology of the network and monitoring of the switches, routers, and servers.

Nagios XI helped me to draw the network and check for system failures.

The Configuration Wizard needs improvement, because not all vendors are present.

About 1 year.

No.

No.

• The integration with the alerting software 
• Automated maintenance windows 
• The ability to set up templates and groups of checks, as well as customize the checks themselves.

We receive alerts for services and servers experiencing problems throughout the day and night, so we can maintain 24/7 monitoring.

Improve the documentation, examples, and best practices, therefore users can understand how to do things. Luckily, I had someone teach me the ropes, but to newcomers without someone to train them, it would be very difficult to learn.

Around two years.

Generally, it is very stable platform. Occasionally, we have to restart the monitoring engine, but it is very easy to do.

Adding new servers and passive checks (which require setting up agents and NRDS) on servers are a little difficult to do properly when employees don't understand the process. Since documentation is lacking, it's a matter of trial and error before things work properly. So yes, scalability could be improved.

We did not purchase support, therefore building the entire platform in-house. This has probably led to us not using best practices.

It's generally good, but lacks documentation.

Since this is an open source technology, if we are capable of writing the plugins in any scripting language, this product allows us to monitor anything we want.

Since my organization has many companies in the form of customers for handling their infrastructure and application, we used to use the paid tool before. However, the open source technology is the best thing for an organization in today's world. When it comes to monitoring Nagios, it is the first choice in open source tools. We started using the Nagios XI for monitoring and it also has a feature for handling events, which we can use to integrate for creating tickets with any ticketing tool using its API.

Nagios XI can improve its GUI for users with a new look. Otherwise, we could develop it on our own. This is the reason I think most users don't prefer it, but technically it is a very strong tool.

Four years.

No. Its new releases come from time to time. Also, if you don't have much expertise, you can opt for its support, but it's a paid service.

An eight out of 10, because technical support always has room for improvement.

Yes, we used a paid monitoring tool and used to pay a lot of money. Nagios saves a lot of money for the company.

Nagios is straightforward and simple. It has very good documentation as well as a very active forum, too.

If you can build a Nagios with add-ons, you can use Nagios without any pricing and licensing. Also Nagios XI does not charge much as compared to other monitoring tools. It is best in terms of pricing, too. I would suggest that if you have expertise, you should go for Nagios and build a Nagios XI type monitoring system without any license or pricing.

Nope, but I know the other monitoring tools which are paid as well as the open source. I like Nagios in comparison to them.

Enjoy Nagios. No need of advice. This is very good product. Just use it and experience it.

Nagios is the best monitoring tool that I have ever worked on. You will never like it if you compare it with other paid tools based on the graphical interface or any other features. Nagios is the best open source tool. We can create a plugin by ourselves and actually monitor whatever we want.

Nagios XI is a Nagios, which is flavored with some features and we have to pay for it. If we use Nagios, we can build ourselves the Nagios XI feature on our own using the add-ons.