We performed a comparison between Auvik Network Management (ANM) and Mist AI and Cloud based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Datadog, Auvik and others in Network Monitoring Software."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"I like the fact that it's easy to set up and learn our network. I've used some other systems where it takes a lot of time and effort to manage the monitoring system, so you get what you put into it. The nice thing about Auvik is that you put the credentials in, put the agent on the network, and it just does its thing. It sets up alerts that you would most likely turn on anyway without even having to do it. If you add another new device to the network, it detects it and sets alerts up for that device. With the other systems that I've used, I had to manually add those devices in and manually set the alerts for new devices. I like that it's an almost set-it-and-forget-it sort of system."
"The SNMP discovery features are impressive; few products are as robust in their abilities, and it discovered objects I didn't think it would."
"I like the information Auvik provides you about switches that helps you troubleshoot connectivity issues between clients and switches. It's much easier to locate where the problem is on the network. We were using N-central for our RMM. Unfortunately, that doesn't map out the switches. It tells us what is up or down but doesn't do a good job of network troubleshooting like Auvik does."
"With the TrafficInsights option, I have information and statistics regarding our traffic and what is currently being utilized in terms of bandwidth. I use it quite often to establish if our bandwidth is fully utilized or not and whether there is any slowness on the network."
"The network flow piece is the most useful. We can identify the busiest parts of the network based on the reporting from the switches about what is utilizing the most bandwidth on specific switch ports. I can narrow down which segments of the network might be having issues."
"The monitoring and backup are the most valuable features."
"In the past, I would manually input the credentials and IP address of a single device from my machine and access the device, which took a lot of time. A task that previously took 40-45 minutes can be completed in less than five minutes with Auvik. It reduces the time needed to check a device for a single company, so we can act quickly before a disaster happens."
"The ability to put in individualized SNMP checks that might not be in the automated playbook is a valuable feature."
"I have a very good experience with the solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"Ability to control the access points by groups."
"Mist AI and Cloud have definitely improved the functioning of our organization. The access to the Internet, including its speed and reliability, has significantly improved."
"Has an extremely good feature set."
"There are several valuable features. One of them is Cibas, and another one is Marvis."
"AI is the most valuable feature."
"The Marvis feature of Mist AI, an artificial intelligence tool, is very useful."
"The most valuable aspect is that they operate on small microservices, offering numerous open APIs that enhance the value of our Wi-Fi network. This flexibility allows us to optimize various aspects such as workforce planning and occupancy management. The platform is highly open in the market, providing robust APIs for seamless integration with other tools. Currently, we leverage these capabilities at a building site, incorporating IoT sensors to gather data. The collected data is stored in a centralized location, and we plan to use AI for analysis. This analysis will include insights on peak activity times, humidity levels, temperature variations, and other relevant metrics within the building."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"I would like to see some recommendations in terms of steps that could be taken to assess the alerts. A platform that I have used is Darktrace, which does security testing, and it let us know what was going on, what may have caused it, and what could be done... if Auvik could recommend common ways to go about doing what needs to be done to resolve an alert, that would be helpful."
"The reporting needs a little bit of improvement. Sometimes, I get too many reports. Or, I don't get reports when I should be getting reports. I don't know if this is Auvik's fault or the devices that the reporting is coming from, but I have noticed there have been some discrepancies."
"I want to be able to customize the layout more in terms of showing the alert timeframes. For example, I would like to customize it to show all the alerts in the last three hours, six hours, etc. You should be able to customize it so that it shows you the most critical information. We don't need to see CPU usage. We only want to see the up and down time. It would be nice to filter out many of those metrics we don't use."
"Auvik could have better compatibility with more devices. The devices that we're using are essential within our network infrastructure. It would be great to access the full range of features that some of the other ones do, such as the device configuration backups and the configuration change alert."
"I would like to be able to get a little bit more granularity in turning on and off alerts because I get flooded with alerts. It gives too much information at times."
"I don't know if it has integrations with ticketing systems so that alerts would get to the ticketing system right away. That would be a good feature to add."
"I would like a Power BI-style dashboard that you could show to a non-technical person with metrics like the number of devices accessing wireless, the amount of internet, total issues resolved each month, etc."
"I'm still undergoing the trial period. My only complaint is that I still don't understand what the license cost will be. More transparent pricing would be massive."
"The inter-functionality with other vendors was a negative for us."
"Regarding opportunities for improvement in Mist, it is notable for its robust cloud portal and integration of artificial intelligence into various services, creating a highly efficient environment for work. However, a drawback lies in the cost associated with its WiFi offerings. With a pricing range of twelve hundred to fifteen hundred dollars for a single Access Point, exclusive of the subscription, it is acknowledged as a relatively expensive solution in the realm of WiFi services. Despite this drawback, the positive attributes of Mist make it a noteworthy option."
"The solution doesn't provide mail notifications currently."
"The user experience should be improved. It's not user-friendly."
"Currently, the solution lacks the ability to configure with other solutions from other vendors."
"It would be beneficial to have support for the Chinese language."
"Mist AI and Cloud need to improve the configuration speed."
"There could be more integration."
More Auvik Network Management (ANM) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Auvik Network Management (ANM) is ranked 3rd in Network Monitoring Software with 133 reviews while Mist AI and Cloud is ranked 7th in Wireless LAN with 21 reviews. Auvik Network Management (ANM) is rated 8.8, while Mist AI and Cloud is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Auvik Network Management (ANM) writes "Enables us to get on top of issues before they become an outage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Mist AI and Cloud writes "A combination of artificial intelligence, machine learning, and data science techniques to optimize user experiences". Auvik Network Management (ANM) is most compared with PRTG Network Monitor, LogicMonitor, SolarWinds NPM, Meraki Dashboard and Zabbix, whereas Mist AI and Cloud is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Aruba Wireless, Cisco Wireless, ExtremeCloud IQ and Ruckus Wireless.
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.
