The platform has a lot of interesting capabilities. Implementation is simplified, in contrast to some products like SolarWinds, where external assistance is often required for meet uploads. It is more inexpensive than other products in the market.

In a specific customer implementation, the complex topology of the customer's network revealed a separate and closed segment at one of their sites. We could not understand the status of the broken network and devices. With the help of NNMi, we got a view of the issues.

The product helps us reduce downtime and improve incident response time by offering remediation options. The tools run automatically, checking the network activities for different areas and time zones. It provides efficient documentation, interface, and integration features.

I rate the product a nine out of ten.

The fault availability is good, and the performance is okay. However, the smart plugin performance for traffic is not as good. So, I would rate Micro Focus Network Node Manager at seven on a scale from one to ten.

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. Using this solution depends on an organization's requirements and environment. For us, we need to cover everything. We need fault, availability, performance, and security. Our challenge is handling, understanding and analyzing the traffic. We've covered the fault and availability and now need an analysis of traffic and behaviour.

Micro Focus is a very mature product but some basic requirements are missing and there are services that they don't offer. For example, I'm an end-user. The way the solution currently works means I'm not able to customize my own reports.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

It's important for the customer to understand his own requirements so that he can make the right decision because this network node manager has multiple components. Whether it's network monitoring, reporting, IP telephoning, or MPLS VPN. There are a lot of extensive packs available. The customer also needs to think about their requirements based on the product extension packs and how they would be deployed. These are things that need to be taken into consideration. 

I would rate this product a nine out of 10. 

This is a stable solution fit for any infrastructure size. It can be used for monitoring and management in a multi-vendor environment. The solution is the best for you to use if you want to manage nodes from HP, Aruba, Cisco, Fortinet, and FortiGate because it is able to manage different vendors. It has a simple polling architecture making polling and discovery pretty easy.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

I have no advice unless HPE comes up with the new version of Vertica. They are moving to HPE Vertica 8, I think, for the next release. I'm expecting some improvements with Vertica, but I'm not expecting it anytime soon.

I would recommend the solution to others due to the fact that it's quite stable and mature. That said, there are a few improvements that can be made.

Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

Before implementing, clear all the customer requirements, then choose products accordingly.

I work with big vendors like HPE as well as start-ups, especially now that we're on our hybrid journey. I'm using them to do backups for me on the cloud; both end-user computing backups, as well as server backups. Azure backup doesn't seem to work out for me.

I think what I would really be looking at in a vendor is does the vendor vision really synchronize very well with my vision of where I want to be? What is it that I'm looking for when want something to be provided to my end customers who are our 170,000 employees out there?

I have a vision. I have a roadmap. I have quarterly deadlines to say, "This is what I'm going to be doing and can a vendor really support me to do that?" I'm okay if they don't have some features, because I don't think everybody's figured out everything yet. As long as I know that: a) they really are gung-ho about the vision that I have and they're completely in line with that vision, and b) they have the capabilities to be able to solve some of those niggling problems which will definitely pop up when we're going to go through a transformation program of this kind of scale. Then I'm okay with them.

I rate this solution seven out of 10. 

I rate Micro Focus Network Node Manager a six out of ten.

You should interact more with the customers and listen to your voice.

Try to make the product better from the usability perspective.

We base our decision of vendor really around the support issue. It's really about stability of the product you have, and your escalation levels should also be playing a role, because if you run into problems, you need to know who your friend is.

I think you should take a look at it. If it fits your needs, then it's OK. But it's not the only solution. There are other alternatives.

When choosing a vendor, the solution has to be a benefit to our companies. It must be a complete package. The best software turns out to be not the best thing if technical support is not good or there are other issues; then go with something else.

Initially, keeping the default settings is wise. Get familiar with and become knowledgeable in the product before getting into advanced tweaking.

The solution is part of the HP NMS solution and the unification helps in keeping a flow of processes going in the organisation.