We performed a comparison between eG Enterprise and Zabbix based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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."
"The auto-configuration or auto-Thresholding is very important because it saves a phenomenal amount of labor and setup costs and time."
"What I like about eG Enterprise is that it's easy to use. It's a simple product. You can get up to seventy-five to eighty percent of the required information based on real user experience and diagnostics."
"It gives good insight into inside of what's going on with Exchange."
"Its ability to monitor failures and to restart a Windows service when it fails."
"User session details"
"The product is simple to use."
"The most important feature is the ability to design, then implement monitoring tests on the fly as we are adapting to different situations."
"The ability to see what the end user response is, so I can get a better understanding of what the end user is seeing when they connect to the Citrix servers."
"It's a flexible solution."
"Zabbix can use old data to current data to set the threshold. We can use previous data to set the threshold."
"It can send messages to our ticketing system."
"The integration with third-party tools and the alerts are most valuable."
"The most valuable feature is the alert and alarm monitoring."
"It's a very reliable platform and we've never had any issues regarding the scalability or the stability of Zabbix."
"There is less computing power needed for scaling."
"It not only provides the preconfigured item monitoring feature, but it is also easy to configure custom items."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"Their dashboards could use some improvement. The ability to customize them a bit more."
"Back-end configuration is not easy to implement."
"would like to see improvements in the alarm display console."
"I can understand why they designed the user interface (UI) the way they did, but sometimes in the management of the eG Manager, it can be a bit clunky."
"The integration must be improved."
"The solution should improve on the security side and include some more API integrations into wider application platforms."
"Needs to improve the networking monitor capabilities."
"In terms of sales or market perspective, they must invest in Latin America with professionals with a more marked presence."
"The product delivers false positives during reporting because of flapping. Other reasonably priced alternatives may have better performance."
"Documentation terminology could be improved."
"The stability could be better."
"It could be more stable."
"If Zabbix had a better dashboard then it would be nice."
"Implementation is always tailored to the customer and the kind of information we need from the client to carry it out can make them very uncomfortable. Sometimes the clients are not ready to share it."
"Its UI needs to be improved a little bit more so that an end-user is also able to handle it. I can handle it, but others should also be able to handle it in a better way. It becomes complex when we are growing and need to add proxies. We need more scalability features and documentation for different use cases. A lot of articles are available, but they need to be in proper documentation. For example, when you have thousands of servers that have to be monitored in different regions of the world, there should be some kind of documentation to describe how you can create proxies and add them. Sometimes, when you are using the database, it can get overloaded. When the network is growing, the number of transactions becomes very high, and the database gets overloaded. There should be information about how to reduce the load on the MySQL database, which is what Zabbix is using. The market is growing a lot, and it should be enhanced for a lot more things. We are currently bringing enhancements at our end for different use cases. For example, when dockerization is going on, how can we check the logs inside the Dockers. We should also be able to monitor and check the number of logins and add features such as SSO login and two-factor authentication as a protocol. These are the security features and concerns that we have to deal with. Currently, we are developing modules to add features to Zabbix, but they should also work on these features."
"In the next release, I'm hoping for features targeted towards larger users with more customizable options. Despite this, I think pre-canned reports that can be used straight out of the box would be beneficial rather than having to configure each report individually. Additionally, a deeper dive into software configurations on the machines would be useful, although I understand there may be challenges in implementing this due to scripting requirements. More documentation would also be appreciated."
eG Enterprise is ranked 40th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 21 reviews while Zabbix is ranked 10th in Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability with 100 reviews. eG Enterprise is rated 8.2, while Zabbix is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of eG Enterprise writes "Great visibility, easy to set up, and has very responsive technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zabbix writes "Allows any number of customizations but lacks functionality for finding root causes". eG Enterprise is most compared with Grafana, ControlUp, AppDynamics, Dynatrace and PRTG Network Monitor, whereas Zabbix is most compared with Centreon, Checkmk, SolarWinds NPM, Nagios Core and Nagios XI. See our Zabbix vs. eG Enterprise report.
See our list of best Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability vendors, best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors, and best Network Monitoring Software vendors.
We monitor all Application Performance Monitoring (APM) and Observability 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.
