Statseeker Reviews

We primarily use this solution for educational content.

This solution allows us to have fewer employees.

It reduces the complexity of our network monitoring. We are better able to manage all of our components.

We make use of Cisco ACI support, we do this to make quotas.

It has affected the workload of our network admin team. It is awesome. We have fewer employees.

Our network availability is increasing and it does reduce costs, but I do not know by how much.

The most valuable features are scalability and reliability. Network visibility is good. 

Technical support needs improvement.

Stability is excellent.

The scalability of this solution is good.

Technical support for this solution is bad, as is everything with Cisco support.

The initial setup of this solution is complex.

We had assistance in implementing this solution.

We only evaluated Cisco and HP when researching this solution.

This solution is not perfect.

Always try to minimize the effort by the support teams to keep the solution alive.

I would rate it a seven out of ten.

We use this solution to control bandwidth congestion, and also for the recovery of unused data network ports.

It has somewhat helped the workload of our network admin team. The recovery reports have streamlined our process, and diagnosing certain congestions is easier.

This solution provides a deeper investigation into certain circuit congestions. It’s a much quicker way to drive into troubleshooting congestion issues.

The most valuable feature is the recovery of the unused data ports. We're able to recover more expensive ports on our access line devices. For example, we can run a report that dynamically pulls out all of the ports that haven't been used in ninety days. We can then recover those for new and upcoming projects. We don't have to buy additional hardware in order to expand. There are a few other companies that do this, but Statseeker and AKIPS are probably the two that do it the best.

This tool is fairly easy to use.

Network visibility is fantastic. Statseeker has worked out really well for us.

If it had more detailed NetFlow information then it would be far better. This would allow us to find the top talkers and congestion situations. It would be helpful to be able to drill down quickly and identify a top talker to pull them off and streamline a congested circuit.

A lower cost, overall, would be fantastic.

The reporting functionality can be cleaned up a little bit. Some of the reporting operations happen on the right side of the pane, where you move from right to left, which is less intuitive than it should be. A top-down approach would be much more simple. Right to left is less natural because in English we read from top-down, left to right.

This solution is stable.

The scalability is adequate.

Technical support for this solution is adequate.

We have used several different solutions.

The SolarWinds solution is probably the most encompassing and probably the closest thing that we can get to a single pane of glass. However, they do not have unused ninety-day reports or circuit utilization. Also, their NetFlow is a tad bit lacking.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's a fairly intuitive tool to set up, and adding a network device is pretty simple.

We deployed the solution ourselves.

We're able to recover ports from our system and defer costs and new hardware, which has been somewhat beneficial, but how much cost avoidance has actually helped us streamline is not something that we can capture really well.

This tool would probably be priced well if it had deeper NetFlow capabilities, but for our use case, in particular, we're only recovering ports after ninety days and looking at circuit congestion, it's pretty pricey.

AKIPS offers pretty much an exact feature set to Statseeker but is significantly less expensive.

This product provides some good functionality. However, the reporting is right to left, which is less than ideal, the cost is significantly high, and the NetFlow capabilities are lacking.

My advice is to go with AKIPS, rather than this solution.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Our primary and only use for this product is for network monitoring.

The product does what we need it to do, and definitely gives us heads-up on results and issues we are having in a timely manner.

The most valuable feature — and the value of the product — lie in its delivery of day-to-day, real-time information.

The user interface could be more friendly. When I say user-friendly I mean additional windows with information on additional day-to-day statistics.

It could also benefit the user more if it had additional features for reporting.

It's really stable. We haven't had any problems with stability at all.

It's a very scalable solution. We've used it with most of our network equipment monitoring and we haven't had any performance issues or any other problems.

We previously had WhatsUp Gold which is a really cheap solution. We needed something with better analytical abilities, better reporting, generally better information, and a better interface.

It is straightforward to set up.

I have not seen a measured return on investment. It's a great product. I definitely haven't had any negative experiences with it. I definitely think it helps with day to day operations. That could be a return on investment but it would be hard to measure.

I would give this solution about an eight out of ten. It's not perfect, but it's still a good product. We definitely enjoyed using it. It's fairly simple and easy to use, and it's pretty straightforward. It gives us a lot of information that we need.

Our primary use for this solution is historical traffic wrapping.

This solution only handles a very small slice of what we actually need to monitor, so it is just another product in a set of products we use.

This solution helps in terms of troubleshooting, and you can do capacity planning with it.

The single pane of glass simplifies management because I don’t have to spend time supporting eight different products. I only have to support one.

The most valuable features are the tracking of trends and the presenting of graphs.

The granularity is not the best and it's not the worst. It’s fine

The user interface needs a great deal of improvement.

The stability of this solution is fine.

Scalability is horrible. The more stuff we add to Statseeker the more we have to sift through with a horrible interface. It doesn't scale well.

I am not the person that deals with technical support.

Switching had to do with the cost of supporting multiple products. If there is just one product that does it all then it's cheaper, in the long run, to maintain and manage.

I was not the one who deployed this solution, so I do not know.

We evaluated StableNet from Infosim, and we went with them because they had the most functionality of all of the different products that we use.

The interface for this solution is terrible and can be improved in literally any way.

I would rate this solution a three out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution is network monitoring.

This solution provides us with a quicker response in troubleshooting. It allows my engineers to do their job faster.

It reduces the troubleshooting time to pinpoint issues quicker. We now have a faster response to outages and thus faster remediation and up-time.

The most valuable features are that it is fast and easy to use. 

This solution is very in-depth and granular. I can look at one-minute data points and it does not roll data up over time.

It may be helpful to have more options in the alerting section.

The stability of this solution is very good.

Scalability is very good.

Technical support is very good. They've always solved every issue that we've had.

We used a home-grown solution prior to this one, so switching to Stateseeker was easy. It is inexpensive, it fits the need, and it was very fast to implement.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

We implemented this solution in-house.

The ROI comes from the reduction in time that our network engineers spend troubleshooting, leaving them to focus on more important issues.

We pay somewhere between $5,000 and $8,000 yearly in licensing fees.

We did evaluate one or two other options, but we chose this solution because of the ease of use and deployment, as well as the simple interface.

This is a great product for anybody looking for network monitoring, and I would highly recommend it.

Having that one-minute granularity, that doesn't roll up over time, is incredibly important if we want to do any historical troubleshooting.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use for this solution is troubleshooting. We use it for logging and monitoring the routers and switches in the environment. It assists us with capacity planning.

This is a very cheap solution in order for us to accomplish what we needed to do in terms of providing visibility into the network. The visibility is such that it allows us to be a little proactive when it comes down to issues in the environment. It provides us with graphs and stats that we can use to make sure that there is not an issue with the network.

This solution complements our network monitoring. We have other products that provide a more comprehensive type of monitoring, and this one supplements that, especially for the retail environment.

It allows us to have some visibility into our service provider's equipment. It provides us the last-mile circuits down to the stores that we have.

It has helped our network admin team because it gives them visibility into the environment when there are issues. Workload-wise, I think it probably saves them time.

It just allows us to be more proactive. It gives a way to diagnose issues when they arise.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the simplicity of adding new devices into it.

I would like to see more comprehensive reporting and alerting. We do have other, more expensive solutions that handle that aspect of it. However, it would be nice to be able to specify baseline thresholds. If we're approaching those then we would be alerted, and it would probably help us with our job of troubleshooting.

This is a very stable solution. It hasn't gone down.

Scalability-wise, it's a monitoring platform so it's pulling these devices via SNMP. I would say if I needed an additional service to take on the workload then I would just provide additional storage. It's very simple to install.

This component is so easy that we rarely needed to call support. When we did contact them then they were very effective. No issues.

The initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

We deployed this solution with our in-house team.

We have seen ROI through the ability to troubleshoot more effectively. That is where the benefits came in.

When it came to selecting this solution, it came down to cost. Our licensing fees are on an annual basis.

We looked at several options including Voyance, Computer Associates eHealth, and SolarWinds. The Statseeker solution stood out because it was simple to use and easy to deploy.

This is a good solution in terms of ease of use and ease of deployment. It is a cost-effective solution that provides basic functionality. However, the bells and whistles that other vendors have will need to be provided or enhanced in Statseeker in order for it to compete. 

The biggest lesson that I learned is how easy it is deployed.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Our primary use case is for monitoring traffic.

This solution allowed us to track down trouble users.

Being able to look at individual devices is the feature we found most useful.

It's stable as far as I'm concerned.

Scalability has been fine for us, thus far.

I haven't had any personal experience with technical support yet, so I don't know.

The solution's granularity in terms of network visibility is pretty solid. I haven't used it too often lately though. I'm not in that section of the organization anymore.

I don't know that the solution has had much of an impact on the complexity of our network monitoring. It's just another tool we can use.

I'm sure Statseeker has helped a little bit with our network availability, at some point.

From my experience, I'd give it an eight out of ten. It has worked when I needed it to.

Our primary use case for this solution is network monitoring.

We have Statseeker alerts emailed to a Google group, and one of the members of that group is a Slack integration. This means that we get instant alerts on Slack, from Statseeker, whenever an event happens.

All of our UPS units are set to send SNMP traps to Statseeker whenever their batteries are in need of replacement, or they start failing self-tests. Statseeker then generates an alert based on that trap, which proactively tells our UPS people that this battery is in trouble.

The most valuable feature is the ping going out every second, which gives us almost instantaneous alerting.

The user interface allows us to sort according to the source of network packets, which helps us to quickly narrow down problems.

This solution would be improved with better automatic discovery for ping-only devices. Every time we add an access point, which is a ping-only device, we also have to remember to add it to Statseeker. It would be very helpful if while doing a ping sweep of our network, once Statseeker discovers a new device, it performed a reverse DNS lookup on the IP address to get the hostname and then automatically add it.

The stability of this solution is awesome. Except when it comes time for upgrades, we don't touch it and it just keeps going.

We are a smaller enterprise, but we're watching approximately fifteen-thousand switchboards with no problem at all. The scalability is awesome.

Technical support for this solution is great.

We have been using Statseeker the entire time that I have been with the company.

I was not with the company for the initial setup and deployment.

We receive discounted pricing for being an educational user. Compared to other solutions such as Zabbix and AKiPS, this solution is very well priced.

We have looked at a couple of other solutions like Zabbix and AKiPS, and Statseeker has consistently underpriced everybody.

If this solution offers a trial then I would suggest giving it a try. In my experience, there is not much better than this.

We set a two-minute bundle time so that we don't get completely inundated with alerts.

There is a bug we have encountered, where if we accidentally add a ping-only device as an SNMP device, and then that device goes down, it doesn't report back as "down".

Overall, I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I was primarily using this solution for network traffic analysis. We are switching to another product.

If somebody is complaining about slow networking then this solution allows us to see various ports to find out whether they are being overloaded.

The most valuable feature is the ability to look at historical traffic.

A more user-friendly interface would help because it is sometimes difficult to find specific data that you are looking for. It would be nice if I could easily select individual interfaces.

It would be helpful to be able to view specific ports, more easily.

From what we have discovered, it is not really a single pane of glass.

Stability-wise, this is a good solution.

I do not feel that this solution is very scalable. It is sometimes hard to drill down and find specific interfaces that you need to track.

I have not dealt with their technical support.

We did not use another solution prior to this one. However, we are switching from Statseeker to Observium. The reason for the switch is that in Observium, the interface is really well-refined. You can select individual interfaces and you can pull up graphs really easily.

I was not part of the initial setup.

One of our in-house staff performed the setup.

I have not tracked the ROI.

This is a solution that is useful when you can find the information. It would benefit from being able to view specific ports more easily.

For my recommendation, I would suggest Observium over this solution.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is fault management.

This solution has helped us to proactively identify issues and push some of those fixes down to tier one.

The most valuable features are the quick retrieval of performance data, and its ability to poll tens of thousands of interfaces at short intervals.

The single pane of glass for fault and performance data is very helpful.

I would like to see NetFlow improved, with better reporting capabilities that are similar to Scrutinizer.

I would like to see some layer two and layer three topology mappings, similar to what NNMi and SolarWinds presents. For fault, it's very good, but for tier one, they like to see pictures.

This is a very stable solution.

The scalability of this solution is very good.

I would rate their technical support a nine out of ten.

We used HP NNMi prior to this solution. However, they out-priced themselves so we switched.

The initial setup for this solution is straightforward. This is a turnkey solution and it is very easy to deploy.

I implemented the solution myself.

We have not seen ROI.

We have used SolarWinds and HP NNMi. We decided that Statseeker was by far the best solution.

My suggestion for anybody considering this solution is to evaluate at least four other products to see what works best.

I think that the NetFlow portion of the solution needs to be enhanced, but the fault and performance stuff is solid.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.