We performed a comparison between TruView and Zabbix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The single dashboard is a valuable feature."
"We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"The most valuable feature for us was the ability to monitor sites and get a nice overview of all the data in a single view."
"I have found that the reporting feature in Zabbix is most valuable. Additionally, the solution has given us bandwidth options, we are able to see where problems are. For example, we noticed a problem that occurred because of a bad interface going in the wireless VLAN."
"Every new asset placed in the environment can be automatically detected, predicting human failures."
"The best thing about Zabbix is the integration and the APIs that are included are very fast"
"The initial setup, while not simple, is easier than other products."
"It not only provides the preconfigured item monitoring feature, but it is also easy to configure custom items."
"Zabbix is scalable."
"The basic setup is very easy."
"The implementation process is very straightforward."
"The technical support needs improvement."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"One area that could be improved is the reporting features. In the version transformation from ten to eleven, the platform changed from a Windows-based platform to a Linux-based platform. As a result, the previous reporting feature using Crystal Reports was no longer available. Instead, we had to generate PDF dashboard reports, which were not as flexible."
"It would be helpful if they translated the documentation to Cyrillic languages."
"In an upcoming release, there should be automated reports which we are currently doing manually. For example, if we collect a report file every day and want to send it to a moderator for review. We are expecting this feature to come out soon but it would be valuable to have now."
"I would like to better be able to monitor Oracle processes."
"We would like to see the addition of automatic push functionality to this product. This would save time when monitoring our servers and networks as, at present, we have to manually install the Zabbix agent on any hardware to be monitored."
"The event correlation could be better."
"We had some scalability issues with a large number of nodes."
"For us, the initial setup was complex"
"Its UI should be improved. They did some improvements in version 5, but it could benefit from some more work. Its integrations should also be improved. They've been active for one year, and they seem to have noticed that. It has new integrations, but it could benefit from more integrations. As far as I know, there is no model to push statistics, metrics, or events towards Zabbix. This type of API isn't yet there, whereas some other tools provide an API for this."
More Juniper Mist Premium Analytics Pricing and Cost Advice →
TruView is ranked 53rd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 1st in Network Monitoring Software with 101 reviews. TruView is rated 9.6, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of TruView writes "We lacked visibility into network and app performance, so we chose Visual TruView to proactively manage our network". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". TruView is most compared with NETSCOUT nGeniusONE and Softinventive Lab Total Network Monitor, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Amazon CloudWatch and SolarWinds NPM. See our TruView vs. Zabbix report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Network Monitoring Software reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.