We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and Nagios XI 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."We can manage the entire system across the network and troubleshoot the pain points."
"Technical support is great."
"I can use the Drag and Drop feature to build dashboards within minutes."
"It gives an alarm when there's something going on, not just when there's an expected spike that happens every night on a server."
"MultiWAN and Balance service"
"It is easy to implement."
"It is reliable when it comes to monitoring."
"The real value is our being able to pull all the historic data that we need in order to gather every little metric and nuanced piece of information from a given device, a given piece of infrastructure, in order for us to generate alerts."
"This solution allows us to have an overview of the infrastructure and identify areas where the performance isn't optimal, or where upgrades could be carried out."
"The most valuable features of Nagios XI are you can customize it based on your use case and requirements. It is flexible and easy to integrate with our systems. You can customize the solution by adding additional features using code."
"It's great for monitoring IT services infrastructure."
"The solution has a lot of plugins and scripts integrated with it."
"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."
"BPI: It allows defining peripherals to map business criticality for efficient monitoring, as required."
"Nagios is stable and it's easy to use the monitoring software, which is why we chose this product."
"The Script Module in Nagios is really easy to use and is really cost efficient."
"The most useful aspect of this solution is the ability to customize it for the client agent."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"We want to see more investment in the UI and the dashboard."
"It would be good to implement views showing the aggregated status graphically."
"I'm very happy with DX Unified Infrastructure Management, but what could be improved is its user interface because currently, it has many wide spaces. All the information you need is in DX Unified Infrastructure Management, and it's a reliable tool, and though that's more important than the gaps in the user interface being smaller or wider, those gaps still need some improvement. I know the team is working on it. My company had some backend problems with DX Unified Infrastructure Management in the past that have now been solved. The setup for the tool also needs improvement because it's complex. Another room for improvement in DX Unified Infrastructure Management is its technical support because it's sometimes not as knowledgeable or responsive. What I'm suggesting to be added to the tool is an open-standard ELK Elastic-based database where you can put in all data, so that you can use the data in other systems as well."
"Within this product there are individual probes, and each of these probes doesn't always necessarily output the same kind of information into our database. So when we try to collect what's called QoS data, from one probe we might get a ton of information, lots of good stuff that we can use in our database, but then from another probe, we might not get so much or we might not be able to pull the things that we want to."
"There should be wider coverage of storage infrastructure."
"In the UMP, certain devices will show up multiple times and they don't correlate correctly. That's one of the issues."
"I think it can be improved by a greater provision of specialized technical support, as there are very few trained personnel there."
"They need to continue to advance the filter capabilities, and provide more input fields."
"The reporting part should be made simpler. While we can obtain all the reports we need, we always have to create work-arounds to get them."
"The way Nagios displays information isn't easy for a new user to understand. It's not intuitive enough. You need to read some tutorials or be trained to understand what it's displaying. Also, I think it needs more features to improve network visibility because there are some things you can't detect."
"The Configuration Wizard needs improvement, because not all vendors are present."
"The interface could be more user-friendly."
"The product's stability could be even better."
"Open-source software is usually not user-friendly."
"The pricing has recently risen. I know they've changed what is covered under the license, however, it doesn't change the way we use it and adds nothing to our experience, and yet we now have to pay more."
"The reporting structure could be more streamlined."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while Nagios XI is ranked 8th in Network Monitoring Software with 54 reviews. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while Nagios XI is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of DX Unified Infrastructure Management writes "Easy to set up, simple to use, and offers great technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios XI writes "Great for monitoring IT services infrastructure with nice tools and helpful notifications". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, SCOM, DX Spectrum and ManageEngine OpManager, whereas Nagios XI is most compared with Nagios Core, Zabbix, PRTG Network Monitor, Wireshark and Icinga. See our DX Unified Infrastructure Management vs. Nagios XI report.
See our list of best Network Monitoring Software vendors, best Server Monitoring vendors, and best Cloud 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.