We performed a comparison between LiveAction LiveNX 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."One of the valuable features is the ability to create CLI scripts on the fly to fix any issues. We were using it for QoS modeling to ensure that we were properly modeling QoS, and it basically said here is what you need to fix to get this QoS done, whether it is ACL or something else. It would either push or recommend. If you have the right credentials, you could also push. It is very good if you are a Cisco shop. It gives you reporting, latency, and bandwidth utilization for your applications, so you can do good capacity management planning. There are a lot of pieces that LiveNX can give you. It is a total NPM solution for SD-WAN."
"Its analytical capability is really good."
"The alerting feature is very good because it allows you to set MOS alerts at various network junctures or data points."
"The product has a very good graphical interface."
"We don't have any complaints about the software. According to my team, it's a very good tool that's very intuitive."
"The intention and the idea of the filter is great."
"All in all, LiveAction LiveNX has become an indispensable tool for maintaining and improving our network's reliability and performance, ultimately supporting our organization's goal of providing timely and dependable delivery services."
"The solution is great for virtualization and preparing the infrastructure in Tanzu to test products. It's very fast and has good visibility."
"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."
"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 features I find most valuable is the querying and alerting capabilities."
"No issues with stability."
"The most valuable aspects of the solution are its ease of use and its ease of implementation."
"For us, the ease of deployment in combination with TMZ was the most important part because we don't have to manually deploy a complex monitoring solution. We can more or less do that with the click of a button, and we are not dependent on the developers to provide us with all the necessary features and functions to make that work. We can just deploy it on a workload cluster and monitor at least a good part of the workload. If we want to go into detail, we clearly need to make changes, but for a good part of application monitoring, it gives us good insights."
"The tool crashes sometimes when we try to pull reports simultaneously."
"This is a horrible solution and I think everything needs to be improved."
"It is not as robust as other NPM solutions. For instance, there is a problem while labeling specific applications. It works well with well-known applications, but when you have to put in new applications that are not very known and set them up with names, ports, URLs, or some protocols, it is not as intuitive."
"The only downside to this software is the price."
"They need to create a more simplified UI."
"Sometimes the solution does not register devices properly and that is a bug."
"Improved documentation and more responsive customer support can help in addressing issues faster."
"The documentation and integration with Kubernetes could be improved."
"It could use a URL document server. Everything in the market is moving towards automation and everybody's looking for the single click operations as well relational data locality."
"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."
"The main problem I have is that the license cost is very high."
"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."
"The implementation is a long process that should be improved."
"The initial setup should be easier and more seamless."
"I would like to see integration with Kubernetes cluster and APIs so that you can manage the entire stack."
More VMware Aria Operations for Applications Pricing and Cost Advice →
LiveAction LiveNX is ranked 53rd in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 7 reviews while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is ranked 35th in IT Infrastructure Monitoring with 9 reviews. LiveAction LiveNX is rated 6.8, while VMware Aria Operations for Applications is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of LiveAction LiveNX writes "Greta visual analytics and real-time monitoring but requires better documentation". 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". LiveAction LiveNX is most compared with ThousandEyes, SolarWinds NPM, Cisco Secure Network Analytics, OmniPeek and NETSCOUT nGeniusONE, whereas VMware Aria Operations for Applications is most compared with Grafana, Dynatrace, Datadog, Zabbix and Prometheus. See our LiveAction LiveNX 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.
