Compare BMC TrueSight Operations Management vs. Nagios Fusion
BMC TrueSight Operations Management is ranked 7th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 10 reviews while Nagios Fusion is ranked 35th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 1 review. BMC TrueSight Operations Management is rated 8.6, while Nagios Fusion is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BMC TrueSight Operations Management writes "Enables us to proactively service our customers and even warn them about problems before they occur". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nagios Fusion writes "Simple solution, easy to manage and easy to monitor". BMC TrueSight Operations Management is most compared with Splunk, IBM Tivoli Composite Application Manager and Dynatrace, whereas Nagios Fusion is most compared with Nagios XI.
 |
Most Helpful Review | |||
| Use Nagios Fusion? Share your opinion. | ||
 Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Paessler AG, Centreon and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Updated: February 2020. 398,567 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |||
Quotes From Members
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros | |
We have one application, which is fairly large. In the past, we had Level 1 and 2 NOC support teams who were responsible for watching dashboards. When they saw an issue in the application, they would call Level 2 or 3 support and escalate the call, if necessary. Now, through the use of this product, we have been able to reduce the headcount by five people, as we are able to eliminate the eyes on the glass. We no longer have people watching the dashboard. We have events which are processed automatically through the system and get to the right people. We had six people in L1s, and now have one. So, we reduced five out of six headcount, which is pretty significant. The solution's event management capabilities are fantastic. We do a best of breed. If, on the network side, they use a different tool, we pull all that data in so that we have a single console. It's kind of like the monitor of monitors. We're able to aggregate all the different types of data sets, whether it's log data, app data, OS data, infrastructure data, or network data. We're able to aggregate all those events and then correlate and be able to say we're having an event. From an administrative standpoint, what stands out in TrueSight is the ability to implement quickly. When they have a requirement to monitor something, we're able to turn that on quickly in their environment. We're able to set up new apps within a day. We're using native monitoring capabilities for all our server hardware, for visibility for applications, for URLs, for webpage response and accuracy, and for monitoring network throughput in a lot of particular instances. We're using lightweight protocols for pinging, for DNS, for LDAP. Using the TrueSight platform we can monitor server performance and notify the customers using the integrated ticketing for events. We can let them know if there are any issues with a server, or application, or database. Its event management capabilities are very open and flexible. I haven't seen a use case scenario with a customer that we couldn't actually solve the problem for, so it's really good. There are some interesting things that happen in an enterprise network (things that people don't normally expect), and the event management product is very flexible. You can solve problems as far as your imagination can go with it. It is breadth. It covers so many different technologies which can roll up into a single console. The noise reduction for ticketing works much better than we have seen in a lot of other companies. | It's very easy to manage and monitor it. |
Cons | |
In a large company of our size, we need multiple people in our company trained. So, I have to take the training classes. Then, I have to go and train the rest of my organization. I would prefer to say to the other people on my team, "Go to this link and..." Or, "Here's a list of training sessions that you can go to which are online and that are free." I think it would help the adoption of their product in the marketplace, personally. Specifically around application performance monitoring, BMC is definitely not the market leader. The Dynatraces, the New Relics and the like are more of the market leaders in that space. I would like to see them grow that space a little bit more aggressively. It has not really been their bread and butter. We were somewhat limited in TrueSight due to some of the RBAC controls not quite being what we wanted as far as delegating out administrative privileges for implementation. But because we were able to turn requests around pretty well, that burden wasn't too heavy. The one piece that I would love to see is a general-purpose, configurable agent which would be a framework that you can deploy on anything, whether it be Java or anything else. It would allow you to easily deploy it on a platform that they support. One of the things that the TrueSight environment is missing is some of the HA abilities. The data collection server called the ISM doesn't really have the HA functionality or workload balancing. It was missing from the previous product as well. It's missing redundancy. I would like to see a little more out-of-the-box event correlation and expanded AIOps type capabilities. Where you can train your artificial intelligence operations to be able to memorize an issue once you encounter one scenario, so if you encounter that same problem, you can get to the root cause very quickly. I definitely would like to see more improvement in the self-diagnostics. I need to know when anything is not working or collecting, long before our customer finds it. We have a unique use case because BMC typically sells this solution into enterprises that are deploying it within their IT, versus to a managed services provider like us where we're supporting thousands of customers. Multi-tenancy and the scalability have been challenges along the way, as we've grown... If anything could have gone better as we were ramping this up and adding a lot of volume to it, I would say it's the scalability. That would be one thing that could be improved. | There are some bugs, although not that many. There are some situations where the solution is not stable but the number of problems is not very high. |
Pricing and Cost Advice | |
We did a five-year, multimillion dollar deal. We're end-of-lifeing it now. Overall, the licensing costs of BMC are a challenge for us in that they're hard costs, whereas open-source monitoring has soft costs, where it's harder to line-item. The only possible additional cost that I can mention, that you might not be aware of, is that it uses Oracle partitioning, if you use Oracle. There are Oracle partitioning fees that go with that. It is a large, complex product. So, there is a commitment of manpower to deploy it, as it is not a cheap product. There is a big upfront cost when you buy the license, then there is annual maintenance. We look at, if I bought a license and paid for maintenance for five years, then average it out, what would be my monthly cost. We have had some of the competing tools come in around four dollars. This is coming in as a premium, which is why I don't have it deployed as I would like it. Therefore, we're in negotiations right now. If I can get it down to the four dollar range, I will triple my deployment in a year and a half. Pricing is all volume-driven. I think we were paying between $80 and $85 per license. That's per unit, for a perpetual license. You pay it one time and then, every year, you pay 20 percent of that for annual maintenance and support. But now that we've grown, we've purchased tens of thousands of licenses and the cost per license has gone down to something like less than $30... We pay license fees of between $150 and $200 per asset. There is an enterprise software license fee, and then you pay a percentage for your maintenance, and then Premier Support. For example, if you buy a two-year license for the product, then the maintenance fee is added to that for two years at X percent a year. Then there's a small fee on top of that for Premier Support... Pricing is very high. | Information Not Available |
 Use our free recommendation engine to learn which IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions are best for your needs. 398,567 professionals have used our research since 2012. | |
Ranking  | |
Views 8,260 Comparisons 4,820 Reviews 11 Average Words per Review 2,613 Avg. Rating 8.5 | Views 47 Comparisons 36 Reviews 1 Average Words per Review 277 Avg. Rating 8.0 |
Top Comparisons | |
 Compared 15% of the time.  Compared 12% of the time.  Compared 11% of the time. |  Compared 100% of the time. |
Also Known As | |
| ProactiveNet, TrueSight Operations Management | |
Learn | |
| BMC | Nagios |
Overview | |
TrueSight Operations Management is a broad ITOM solution that delivers performance monitoring, event management, end user experience management, AIOps use cases and automated remediation and ticketing . It deploys machine learning and analytics to dynamically learn behavior, correlate, analyze, and prioritize event data so IT operations teams can predict, find and fix issues faster across complex, hybrid environments. TrueSight Operations Management provides a converged view of application and infrastructure performance across physical, virtual, multi-cloud and container environments. With visibility into web, mobile, and on-premises applications, TrueSight provides the insight IT operations needs to deliver high-quality digital services quickly and effectively enough to keep pace with business demands. TrueSight helps IT to ensure that the applications and services that drive the business continue to perform optimally by examining operational norms, automatically revealing abnormalities, measuring service impact, and proactively identifying risk. | Nagios Enterprises delivers official products, services, and solutions for and around Nagios – the industry standard in enterprise-grade IT infrastructure monitoring. With millions of users worldwide, Nagios is the undisputed champion in the IT monitoring space. Our team of dedicated professionals works to ensure total customer satisfaction with all the services we provide. Our extensive network of partners helps extend Nagios services and solutions to new organizations and markets worldwide to meet a variety of business needs. Nagios Enterprises was founded in 2007 by Ethan Galstad. Ethan created what would later become known as Nagios in 1999, and currently serves as the President of Nagios Enterprises. |
Offer | |
Learn more about BMC TrueSight Operations Management | Learn more about Nagios Fusion |
Sample Customers | |
| Ensono Transamerica Boston Scientific Park Place Technologies inContact TD Ameritrade PNC Bank | NuBlue, St.Elisabeth Hospital, Akamit Systems, National Radio Astronomy Observatory, ValueClick, Sunrise Banks |
Top Industries | |
Manufacturing Company29% Healthcare Company29% Comms Service Provider14% Government14% Software R&D Company54% Financial Services Firm12% Comms Service Provider10% Government4% | No Data Available |
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Paessler AG, Centreon and others in IT Infrastructure Monitoring. Updated: February 2020.
398,567 professionals have used our research since 2012.
See also BMC TrueSight Operations Management Reviews, Nagios Fusion Reviews, and our list of Best IT Infrastructure Monitoring Companies.
We monitor all IT Infrastructure Monitoring 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.