We evaluated Nagios, SCOM, Zabbix, the Tivoli suite, and Infovista.

I was doing a comparison between Spectrum and different vendors like Celeron, HP, IBM, and for me and a big entity, like a national bank of Egypt, and it was the best. It ranks as number one.

We looked at a lot of different options and Spectrum was the one that met all of our criteria. Scalable and expansive enough to capture everything that we needed to capture, and even things that we did not even know we needed to capture.

We were looking at some of the other giant, old-blood software companies. The main reason we chose Spectrum over any other solution was mainly because it was mature, but it was also going places. We could see the future of where Spectrum was trying to go. We could see where it was going to be and where we needed it to be in two years when we get there in two years. 

Wayne Gretzky said, "I skate to where the hockey puck is going to be." We saw that Spectrum was headed to where the hockey puck was going to be. That means that when we adopted it, it was not where the hockey puck was. We understood that when we were getting it that we would deal with those pains up front, then eventually, we would be ahead of the game.

We evaluated IBM Netcool, different public domain-based SNMP solutions, HP OpenView NNM, and SolarWinds.

We evaluated IBM Tivoli Monitoring.

I have been evaluating the differences between Spectrum and Zabbix, as well as the pricing.

We did consider two other vendors. We considered SolarWinds, and I can't remember the other company but that company didn't last very long. It was somewhat close between CA and SolarWinds, but we decided to go with CA.

I've used HP OpenView, Netcool, EMC Smarts and some others, and whilst specific products might have some 'better' or more-specific features that CA Spectrum might not have, CA Spectrum seemed to be the most vendor-agnostic solution and one that was pretty much ready to go, from install. It also seemed to provide a well-rounded set of features that didn't necessarily cover everything the others did but had essential capabilities and more advanced features too.

We evaluated IBM Tivoli and BMC Patrol/TrueSight.

Riverbed Technology has a similar product that does network monitoring and gathers statistics. The classics, such as HPE OpenView and other similar products were considered.

We looked at other vendors, namely, EMC, SevOne, Riverbed, and HP.

We evaluated SolarWinds NPM and Nagios before choosing this product.

Before choosing this product, we evaluated Tivoli monitoring.

My company, they looked at vendors before Spectrum, but now Spectrum is the primary vendor for fault management.

We had HPE OpenView, SolarWinds, and OPNET tools. We chose CA because we can consolidate all of those tools down. This is why the integration is important. It has allowed us to eliminate a whole bunch of other tools, so we were able to consolidate, and that was a good thing for us.

CA knows about the difficulties with eHealth when going through the upgrade process. I pushed myself to look at my company’s other options because across the board, we're looking for some new implementations. I've been looking for eHealth replacements from other vendors even though our company is CA-centric. As an engineer, I can't really narrow the scope so that we only look at what CA gives us because that's really not to the benefit of the company.

We evaluated SolarWinds, NPM & Nagios before choosing this product.

This was before my time at the company.

Riverbed was one of the other vendors we looked at. Part of the reason CA was attractive is, we did have them come out and set up a demo and a look through. We went through a checklist of what was important to us to evaluate.

The other vendor, we did not have them out. We did some demos with them; we already had some products from them. Honestly, we had a difficult time getting quoting and renewal for what we had. That was part of the reason. We did like the functionality that we saw from the CA. It didn't help that we couldn't get a good, invested communication from the other company that we did have products from.

There weren't really other options. I've looked at other vendors. This is what my company went with, what we've used for a while, and we know it works. So, don't fix what's not broken, basically.

We've had a few previous competitors over the years that I've worked with the company. Spectrum can do SNMP inquiries and alert you that a device is totally unreachable. With some of our previous platforms it was a one way process.

I think the short list for Spectrum was Solar Winds, Nagios, Spectrum, of course, and BMC.

I have looked a little into open source solutions.

Yes

Yes, from IBM

HPE OV and CA IM2.0 were tested, but were found either lacking in scalability or user-friendliness, including the lack of a modern, crisp UI.

At the time we decided to switch from an open source to an enterprise solution, we evaluated HP OpenView, IBM Tivoli, EMC Smarts.

I did not try any other option. It was my first ever option and it worked. The application is well-suited for network monitoring.

We also looked at IBM.

The alternatives that we considered besides CA were EMC, SevOne, and a variety of other products.

We were already committed to Spectrum before I came along.

We looked at a couple of different products; I can't remember which ones, exactly.

Before choosing this product, we did not evaluate alternatives, but I already knew how to listen.

The other option from CA is CA Unified Infrastructure Management, but it lacks for configuration management feature. It is positioned differently on the market.

The company tested tools to verify functionalities and possible integrations, but has always adopted market tools with a quality standard to be able to provide it as a service in our portfolio. We have been unsuccessful in testing other tools for the features we are looking to serve with CA Spectrum.

Mainly, we work with IBM and CA. They are our two main vendors. The most important criteria in selecting a vendor is the level of integration between the different tools. We work with several CA tools, such as SOI, UIM and APM to give us a total view of our infrastructure.

Smarts was a challenger.

We evaluated other solutions, namely OpManager, Zabbix, Nagios, Ipswitch, and WhatsUp Gold.

There are other similar products from IT majors IBM, and HP but we found Spectrum to be the most suitable for all of the major requirements of my organisation.

We evaluated SolarWinds and Azure.

Yes, we also looked at HP OpenView, SolarWinds, and ManageEngine.

We also evaluated Comarch, EMC, HPE, IBM, WANDL and TEOCO.

I played around with SolarWinds and some others, but CA Spectrum gave me a more detailed analysis for fault identification.

No other options were evaluated.

Yes we also looked at Microsoft SCOM.

My role does include a continuous monitoring of other products on the market, but none are near Spectrum’s root cause engine, which really is what it is all about.

We also evaluated SolarWinds before going with CA Spectrum.

Not many others.

I've been working with CA Spectrum since my first work day. I was never in a position where I could take that kind of decision.

The customer considered SolarWinds. They eventually opted for CA Spectrum because it proved to manage and monitor their large infrastructures more effectively.

We looked at other free products, namely Nagios and Zenoss.

We also evaluated HP Openview.