We performed a comparison between Cisco UCS Manager and VMware Aria Operations for Applications based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Infrastructure Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is more robust than other solutions. So, the stability is good."
"When one server fails, we can attach the service profile to a new server, which saves a lot of time."
"The reporting functionality will give you any report you want."
"Technical support has been good so far. We haven't had any issues with them. We're satisfied with the level of service they provide our company."
"Cisco Infrastructure is one of the top vendors and no one can beat them in terms of switching and routing."
"Cisco UCS has different layers of security, and you can do multiple installations of your LIAMs on top of the server and Blade. You can install VMware, Windows Server, Hyper-V, etc."
"I can quickly manage the provisioned servers."
"The most valuable features are flexibility and management."
"Tanzu itself, integrated with multiple solutions, bestows support and security upon a container platform, especially when it comes to managing open-source container platforms such as Kubernetes."
"People are very pleased with the implementation."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"VMware comes with a support team, and if you have trouble, you can easily create a ticket, and VMware will help you. Therefore, the best aspect is the support."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"The features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"No issues with stability."
"This solution allows me to have true visibility for any metrics when it comes to my cloud, and private."
"Cisco UCS is expensive compared to others. The Cisco UCS Chassis is more expensive than a standalone server, but some companies require standalone servers because of their production load and affordability. You need to pay more if you require more features on the Blade or if you need more ports on the switch."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to their security."
"The integration with other solutions could be better. I think Cisco can only integrate using Intersight. There is a second interface available as a SaaS platform, in the cloud, or on-premise. It's based on the Redfish protocol, which is standard for all the B-series servers in the market. We can integrate other solutions using API."
"There is room for improvement in the software part of Cisco UCS Manager. It should be more user-friendly, especially when creating policies."
"Its user interface can be improved. It can be more user-friendly."
"We have three data centers and if we could manage all three data centers using one interface, it would be great."
"I want to be able to schedule multiple sequential updates in one go."
"The automation within the solution needs to be simplified."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"Its billing model is consumption-based. I understand the consumption-based model, but it is not necessarily easy to estimate and guess how many points or how much we are going to consume on a specific application up until we get to that point. So, for us, it would be helpful to have more insights or predictability into what we can expect from a cost perspective if we are starting to use specific features. This can potentially also drive our consumption a bit more."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"They could make it more easy to plug-in data so that a nontechnical person will be able to use it, like accountants or finance people. That way they don't have to ask us."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
"In the new version, I would love to see more prediction capabilities. It would be great if one could see the alerts get a little more enriched with information and become more human-friendly instead of the technical stuff that they put in there. I think those would be really awesome outcomes to get."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco UCS Manager is ranked 30th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 21 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 35th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews. Cisco UCS Manager is rated 8.0, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Cisco UCS Manager writes "Stable and resilient, but slightly more complicated to deploy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of VMware Aria Operations for Applications writes "Easy to deploy, worth the money, and helpful for uptime monitoring and performance insights". Cisco UCS Manager is most compared with Cisco Intersight, Nutanix Prism, HPE OneView, Zabbix and Dell CloudIQ, whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Grafana, Dynatrace, Datadog, Zabbix and Prometheus. See our Cisco UCS Manager vs. VMware Aria Operations for Applications report.
See our list of best IT Infrastructure Monitoring vendors.
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.