We performed a comparison between IxChariot and NetAlly EtherScope nXG based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about NetAlly, Auvik, Wireshark and others in Network Troubleshooting."Implementing IxChariot is very easy and user-friendly."
"The most valuable features are the WiFi troubleshooting, network validation, and cabling validation, and the fact that it's an all-in-one tool. You don't have to carry different tools. The multi-technology functionality and its ability to do WiFi and wired Ethernet analysis in one device are the best aspects."
"One of the biggest pros of AirMapper is that you just hit upload to the cloud and you can use anything with a web browser to look at it and manipulate it, view it, and even share it. The fact that you can review it now on any computer that has web access is phenomenal, versus using the client. That's been fantastic."
"In terms of the solution's full line rate 10-gigabit capability, my other 10 Gb test equipment is much bigger, bulkier, and heavier. One of my ways of assessing the nXG was to compare it with what I knew to be tried and true on 10-gig to make sure that they matched, and they did. It very quickly got my trust. The fact that it can do 10 Gb, without dropping a packet from what I've seen so far — and we used it a lot in that first three months — tells a pretty good story."
"Among those features that are important are the AutoTest to create a profile and then see that the network connection is in line with that profile. Also, the LANBERT test to have an idea about the quality of the cable. It is often the case that you have no reports on the cable infrastructure, so this test is also very valuable for us."
"When it comes to that remote troubleshooting perspective of being able to survey an area to see if there are problems, make adjustments, and then have that same individual resurvey that same area, I don't have to send people to a week long class on how to use the device. I know I am getting consistent results, which can verify near real-time, and whether or not the changes that I have implemented solve the problem."
"EtherScope has made our networking staff more productive. We have remote locations and can use the tools to collaborate. I have other people looking at it at the same time that I am looking at it. With the uploading ability, I can have more eyes on the project at the same time, instead of just one set of eyes."
"The solution’s AirMapper Site Survey app is extremely easy to use. We give it to the technicians and send them out to go do that function. We hand it to the technician who goes onsite, then they take a photo of the overall area of a floor plan and are able to go do that site survey without almost any instruction from any engineer. So, it is very usable for beginner-type techs."
"The most valuable features are LANBERT, Discovery, and AirMapper. AirMapper is the best. Both Discovery and AirMapper are very easy to use because you can view all the problems on a single screen. If you quickly need more details about your network, then AirMapper is the best."
"The graphical user interface needs to be improved."
"AirMapper is very quick and easy once everything is on there, but I would like to see an improvement on how you get things on there. Currently, rather than being able to build up buildings or a site of things, every map is an individual piece. We should be able to set up an AirMapper survey easily and more effectively. At the moment, we just have separate floor plans. It'd be great to be able to build a building and tell where different floors are so that if it hears an AP on the floor below, it doesn't put two APs, one on that floor and one on the other floor, and it knows that there are two floors here. One is on top of the other, and it won't put the AP at both places. It would put it on one of the floors where it would be strongest. This would be one of the biggest improvements."
"One point of contention might be that when we were starting it up for the first time, there was a little bit of confusion about registration and getting the proper support plans applied. So, that could be more streamlined, but that's not uncommon in the industry."
"The small screen is a little bit of a handicap. It would be nice if we could, for instance, connect a larger screen to the device, but it's very user-friendly. You're only limited by the size of the screen. That's the only negative aspect of doing surveys with this device."
"NetAlly doesn't have a spectrum analyzer. I have to use other tools to view the spectrum, and this is a problem."
"The battery life could be better. There have been a couple of times that I used it and put it down, then I went to pick it up and the battery was dead. So, I need to take the power cord with me in order to continue using it."
"The reporting could be better, with more accurate measurements of loss over cables, impedance, etc. The mapping also needs to be improved. You should be able to do free formatting of the topology."
"NetAlly EtherScope nXG's reporting and table qualification could be improved."
"We have had to use a battery pack unit, bringing it with us, when we are doing long testing or a lot of testing. It is like a mini computer, so it does use a lot of battery life."
IxChariot is ranked 9th in Network Troubleshooting with 2 reviews while NetAlly EtherScope nXG is ranked 2nd in Network Troubleshooting with 22 reviews. IxChariot is rated 8.0, while NetAlly EtherScope nXG is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of IxChariot writes "A vast solution with user-friendly features and reasonable pricing". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NetAlly EtherScope nXG writes "Handheld form factor, intuitive interface that is easy to use, helps us quickly troubleshoot network problems". IxChariot is most compared with LinkRunner, whereas NetAlly EtherScope nXG is most compared with LinkRunner, AirCheck G3, LinkSprinter and AirMagnet Survey.
See our list of best Network Troubleshooting vendors.
We monitor all Network Troubleshooting 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.
