I rate the solution a seven out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by improving documentation about its processes. I recommend the solution to users considering implementing it.

I rate the solution as a nine.

They have a service where they come in and configure it or do the setup for you for a price. I don't remember the price, but it was pretty reasonable. If you're not familiar with the platform, that might be a good thing to go with, especially if you don't want to go in and do the ifs and buts trying to set it up. It would be a lot easier if you had them come and set it up for you. With all the alerting and everything else that you have to set up with it, it takes a minute to get it up and running and have everything the way you wanted.

I'd give it a nine out of 10. I was really happy with it.

I would recommend this solution. I feel comfortable working with it.

I would rate ManageEngine OpManager a nine out of ten.

I would suggest to go for it. Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. It is easy to use, user-friendly, covers all the technology, and has low-management time. We don't have to keep an eye on it; it has a good automation option, which keeps us informed. It gives very less false positives. Overall, a really great product. 

I'm currently using ManageEngine OpManager.

Within my organization, thirty people use ManageEngine OpManager daily. The solution is being supported 24 x 7.

In terms of maintenance, a stable code is released every six months, so my team has to go back and plan it accordingly, which means keeping all the servers redundant. During the design process itself, the ManageEngine OpManager team did indicate that every quarter, certain packages would be released because the solution is dependent on Java and other frameworks, so it needs to be patched accordingly. Whenever a new patch is released, or there's a major code release at the design level, you need to keep servers more redundant, so you won't run into any issues, and this has helped my company reduce downtime. The monitoring has been always available and ManageEngine OpManager has never gone down. Only one staff is required for its maintenance.

My advice to others looking into implementing the solution is that if you're a legacy customer and you have budget constraints, ManageEngine OpManager is the way to go because it's a very simple solution for deployment, monitoring, and device availability. Though other competitors have advanced features, if I'm not using those features, then it doesn't matter. I'll be better of with ManageEngine OpManager because it's simple to use.

My rating for ManageEngine OpManager is eight out of ten.

My company is a customer of ManageEngine OpManager, not a partner.

I would rate ManageEngine OpManager a five out of ten.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. It's likely the latest update. 

Based on the high cost, I'd rate the solution six out of ten. 

I don't know if I would recommend it. I would be at 50-50 on recommending it. If you're looking for specific features, then I would recommend it. However, I work with a lot of monitoring products, including SolarWinds and WhatsApp Gold, and I would say your functionality and value would be about 50%. It really depends on what you want to use it for. If I were to use it as straight monitoring, then just note up and down, I would say there are much cheaper options. If you want to use some of the functionality with the firewall analyzer, and NetFlow integration, then it might be a bit more valuable to you. Still, as an overall product, you'd probably prefer SolarWinds over ManageEngine.

For us, it's taken a long time to try to get the stability of the product. Now that we've got stability, it's still taking a long time to get the level of reporting out that we require. It's just slow progress around resolving problems, and maybe that's an integrated problem. I'm not sure. The integrator says that some of it is a vendor-related problem. I see value in certain areas, however, overall, there are better solutions.

I would recommend using the solution. I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm on. 

It is a good return on investment. It is a workload simplified. You can see everything on the screen. You get reports and secure your network, and also get notified if something is wrong or something might happen.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

I would rate the product a seven out of ten. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. The choice of equipment and scale depends on your specific needs. For small to medium-sized businesses (SMBs), basic sets of equipment may suffice.

We are using the current version of the solution. 

I'd advise new users to be prepared to work for results. 

This is not a solution I would recommend. I'd rate the product four out of five overall. 

I would tell someone considering this solution that the ManageEngine support team is very available and helpful, there is plenty of documentation, and the price compared to other products is very affordable.

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten.

I would suggest that organizations first understand their needs and requirements, understand what they really wish to monitor, and take some time to test the product before they start to implement it into their environment. If the environment is very complex, or very large then this may not be the right solution.

However, once this product is tailored and organized according to their needs, then it is very stable and reliable.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate ManageEngine OpManager an eight out of ten.

This is a product that I can recommend to others.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. The reason for that is that it is an exceptional value for the money. It may not be the absolute best, but it is certainly better than most solutions and the price differential is significant.

It is a good idea to get both the application monitoring package and the Ops Manager. They compliment each other, so I would suggest buying both. 

With regards to the implementation, I would suggest making use of an implementer even though it is an easy system to implement. An implementer will have the experience to do the implementation according to standards and proper architecture. This will save you from errors, speed the implementation, and keep you from wasting time doing things over again. We did the original implementation ourselves and then we had to re-build and do things all over again because we didn't have the knowledge of the package. It did work eventually, but it would have worked much more efficiently if done correctly the first time.

Overall, I would rate ManageEngine OpManager at eight out of ten. The solution's technical support is very good, and support staff directly respond to you and contact you.

I would recommend this solution for monitoring.

I rate ManageEngine OpManager an eight out of ten.

Start out with the latest version and keep the product up-to-date. Most of my issues have stemmed from starting as a 10.x install and slowly upgrading to the latest version.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate ManageEngine OpManager a nine.

In general, this product meets all our requirements, whatever our requirements are. I expect the product to perform as promised and use all the features that I need. It monitors the services, uptime, downtime, and that general requirement is met.  

I think I have no real implementation requirements. They are also constantly improving by resolving some bugs and they also add some additional features. For example, now if we want to monitor file integrity and IT management, we can do that.  

They also provide all services through the same console. If you want to, you can get other functionality through OpManager add-ons. If you want a service, you just buy the subscription and use the add-ons and monitor the multiple services in a single console.  

There is firewall monitoring, network monitoring, application monitoring, and network configuration is also provided. For some things, an additional license is required.  

If you had seen the previous versions, it is obvious that they have improved. So as of now, we do not need to ask for any requirements to be fulfilled. The IT person really only needs the alerts and designation as medium, critical, or high priority. This tool does that and it is a good monitoring solution.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would have to rate it a nine. They get a good rating because of the support and the features. Whatever they communicate, they provide.  

We are using another product from the same vendor that's called Device Control. This product is for working on remote sites, and it is necessary because OpManager cannot fulfill our requirements. In Device Control you have the ability to troubleshoot, remote control, and you have inventory management.

For anybody who is researching this type of solution, I would suggest doing a POC to see if this solution will satisfy your goals and requirements in your environment. This will help you with your selection.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Choose the modules that you would need in your organization because they have other modules like Application Manager that we are not using currently.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I am a partner, cybersecurity partner, in Sri Lanka.

I'd rate the solution at a six out of ten. Our issue is mainly with pricing. Technical support also should be improved. More than that, the product has to be feasible in order for me to take it to the customer. I have a couple of potential customers who are truly looking for a different product than this. It just isn't going to give them what they need.

That said, I would recommend OpManager as there are other products I have seen that are not even up to the standard of OpManager.

Before implementation, it is best to clarify all the customer requirements and  then choose products accordingly.

We are moving to a cloud solution.

I prefer ManageEngine OpManager because of the ease of use and the requirements that are needed.

I rate ManageEngine OpManager a ten out of ten.

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. The solution is cheaper than SolarWinds but it lacks many of the latter's features. SolarWinds has a major grip on the reporting and monitoring system. You can use this solution if you have budgetary constraints and do not need intense reporting. 

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it eight out of ten.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I would recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

Easy and agentless to deploy , service and support is excellent.

To have all purchased features available, a Windows base is necessary for product installation. Without that, monitoring and automation thru WMI for Windows will not be available. Works with MySQL or an external MS SQL instance. For performance I recommend an MS SQL instance. Installing a digital certificate is hard (although steps are easy) and doesn't always work first time.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten. The solution is good, but the dashboard could include more features.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

In terms of advice I'd give to others, I'd say they have to create proper maps and ensure proper connectivity. They have to map the switch ports properly so that they will know exactly which port is down and which devices will be affected. They also have to evaluate the utilization and properly set the thresholds, otherwise, they will be getting a lot of notifications.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use the on-premises deployment model. We have about four people using the solution.

I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten.

It's a good solution. I wasn't part of the decision or part of the team at the time that they chose it but it definitely does what we need it for. It has more functionality than what we use it for, so I think it's overall a good solution. The only gripe I have is like everybody else, I would want it to be faster. That's the only issue I have.

I would rate OpManager a nine out of ten. 

It's a very good tool and I would definitely recommend it to someone considering it. 

I would rate it an eight out of ten. Not a ten because there is room for improvement and because it needs storage. 

It would be a 10 out of 10 if they had artificial intelligence features such that, besides monitoring and sending alerts, it would solve the problems in specific nodes that are causing issues. It would be great if we had that.

Download a testing license and try it for 30 days. It's worthwhile to have the tool in your local environment. Also, try to find a local partner that can help you with the initial set up.