We performed a comparison between Icinga and Statseeker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Monitoring Software 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."
"We have found the solution to be stable."
"An affordable solution for small organizations to do basic network monitoring."
"There's a module called Icinga Director, which helps us configure the product using an intuitive interface through clicks instead of creating a text configuration. It's very helpful for us."
"Macros and the ability to connect it to Google Maps are valuable features."
"The best thing about the solution is how it highlights errors, the issues, and what needs my attention. The solution directs me to areas that I should look for first."
"The apply rules feature saves a lot of time."
"This solution has a self-healing handler where if the service is down, it is automatically restarted."
"The drafts are easy but what I like about Icinga is that there are many add-ons that you can download."
"We're able to recover more expensive ports on our access line devices."
"The most valuable features are scalability and reliability."
"The most valuable feature is alerting."
"It catches frequent flapping of the network and provides detailed reports of outages."
"This solution allowed us to track down trouble users."
"I like the fact that I can aggregate multiple interfaces into a single graph. It allows me to quickly the summary of traffic for multiple devices which is helpful."
"The graphics and trends are the most valuable for us."
"Summary Reports provide a quick way to identify where potential issues are. Drill-downs provide more granular details very quickly."
"The Wi-Fi side needs improvement."
"The solution lacks many features important to higher-level IT management and network support."
"We have found some problems with Nagios, and support isn't very responsive."
"The user interface should be improved."
"I think the software is quite good, but we have had problems with getting it to recognize certain areas and amend certain checks, where we needed so we would have to create backend scripts for those checks. Though, being open source, it has the support to create backend scripts, it would be better to have these scripts in-built."
"In general, the product does not look good. However, it does what it is supposed to do. So, the improvements should focus on usability and UI."
"One of the areas that are frustrating is remote monitoring for more than one machine."
"One thing that Icinga lacks is the capability to create advanced and customized dashboards within the tool itself."
"At this time, the layout of the website is a bit difficult. It should be more user-friendly for changing the background and logos."
"The main issue I've seen, in the last six months to a year, is when I upgrade I seem to be hitting bugs. The upgrade won't go smoothly and I have to engage support. These things happen when you upgrade, it's not the end of the world, but from a stability point of view, the only time I've so far, is during upgrades."
"Configuration management: In configuration management it would be helpful if it would backup configuration files (running and start-up configuration) for devices. (Not sure if this is already available in the latest version)."
"This solution would be improved with better automatic discovery for ping-only devices."
"Detailed data can be hard to extract in CSV form. Sometimes, being able to dump down raw data would be good so various time periods across a longer period could be analysed. At present, data can be presented within Statseeker, but there is lots of "white space" between data points."
"The inclusion of configuration management features and SIP links would improve this solution."
"If it had more detailed NetFlow information then it would be far better."
"I would like to have soft alarming. If an inner-base all of a sudden triggers a threshold, we have to rely on a lot of other tools and then we go into Statseeker to verify it. If Statseeker would confirm it preemptively and trigger it into our network panel, that would be nice."
"I would like to see some layer two and layer three topology mappings, similar to what NNMi and SolarWinds presents."
Icinga is ranked 22nd in Network Monitoring Software with 16 reviews while Statseeker is ranked 64th in Network Monitoring Software with 38 reviews. Icinga is rated 7.6, while Statseeker is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Icinga writes "A stable, scalable and cost-effective solution that helps with inbuilt scripts for easy modification". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Statseeker writes "Simplifies monitoring and provides real-time alerts for issues we might not immediately be aware of otherwise". Icinga is most compared with Zabbix, Checkmk, Nagios Core, Nagios XI and Centreon, whereas Statseeker is most compared with Fortinet FortiSIEM. See our Icinga vs. Statseeker report.
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.
