We performed a comparison between DX Unified Infrastructure Management and Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] 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."
"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."
"The benefit is easy installation. Thus, the model approach of the product and out-of-the-box probes, which deliver direct value."
"It is the foundation for our monitoring solution."
"The monitoring of the applications to let our business know when things are performing and that they're up and available."
"I recall the initial setup being straightforward."
"I can use the Drag and Drop feature to build dashboards within minutes."
"I definitely appreciate the flexibility and ease of use. We've been using UIM for almost three years now. It's pretty much point and click, very easy to use. And we've had no problems scaling it to our own environment."
"Scalability and flexibility. The product can grow with your infrastructure so you don't have to install other products. Just add components. It's very simple."
"The next big one is supportability. In a large enterprise, we have many types of technologies. The technology we previously had didn't even support authentication to a lot of those technologies."
"Through porting, we can see how the improvement is happening over a period of time. We can see the overall scenario from the last year, where were we were and where we currently stand."
"The scanning itself is really the core of the tool, and it's what we're most interested in."
"We can manage everything with only a single console on the Tenable SecurityCenter. We can pull and define the policy. We can perform every task on the Tenable SecurityCenter."
"The first of the valuable features is how easy it is to access all of the information that's gathered from the assessments... With a lot of other technologies, like Rapid7, if you're using Nexpose you effectively have to be a DBA to get some of the lower-level results from the scans. And Qualys wasn't very intuitive."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The biggest feature that I've been hoping they would enhance on is inventory management: things like adding/removing nodes."
"The only challenge that I have with this solution is the reporting part. The users are not really comfortable with the kind of reports they are getting. Sometimes, they want to see reports in their own format. Customizing those reports with Jasper is not very easy. It could be because of the knowledge gap. If you have the knowledge of how Jasper can be configured to suit customer requirements in terms of reporting, it is good. There was a time a customer complained about one issue related to Netflow analysis. Broadcom has a separate model for that, but the customer wanted everything bundled together. It could also have IP management so that I am able to see or analyze IPs so that the IPs that are already in use don't get assigned."
"Stability."
"The UIM has no features through goods and services yet. "
"It needs a little bit more functionality in the Admin Console."
"We had to do some work to make what was more of a business class solution work at an enterprise level."
"We would like to see automatic network topology."
"I would like to see auditability. We've built our own audit functionality to ensure that every CI has the desired model configuration applied to it. And we run that on a daily basis. If that became part of the product, I think it might be a little bit less intensive in terms of resource, because we're doing it with scripts."
"In terms of what could be improved, some customers have a problem with SecurityCenter's ticket system. If I want them to assign one of the issues, they may want to assign someone to it or to assign it somewhere else and I may want to break up the ticket."
"There are certain circumstances where they may have found a vulnerable service and they just removed the service completely from the device because nobody was using it. There's no way to go into SecurityCenter and mark it, to say, "This is no longer an issue. It doesn't exist anymore." Or, "The risk was accepted for one year, so let's not report it as 'high' until that one year period is done." The handling of operational flow around vulnerability management could be improved."
"When it comes to... dynamic application scanning, I think they are lagging behind the curve. They have a lackluster solution, to the point where I think they need to determine, as a company, whether or not that's a space they even want to play in."
"One area which is missing is cloud security because there are a lot of configurations. Rapid7 has a product called a DV cloud. I would like to have a similar kind of solution and feature."
More DX Unified Infrastructure Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
DX Unified Infrastructure Management is ranked 38th in Network Monitoring Software with 120 reviews while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Network Monitoring Software. DX Unified Infrastructure Management is rated 8.2, while Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is rated 8.4. 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 Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] writes "Provides the best network-based vulnerability scanning, but the dynamic scanning is lackluster". DX Unified Infrastructure Management is most compared with DX SaaS, DX Spectrum, SCOM, ManageEngine OpManager and Nagios XI, whereas Tenable SecurityCenter Continuous View [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best Network 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.