Customized reporting can be improved. Opsview has a lot of canned reports, and though we were getting a lot of them, the reports we wanted to generate would say what the usage rate during their working day was. Many tools say, "You're at 50% utilization of the network for the week." But those reports are useless because they are looking at a 24-hour day. If you're 100% utilized during the day and zero at night, the week would show 50% utilization. We needed to see the reports to show what Opsview did very well and what the usage is for their business day from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM, local standard time. Those reports were standard.

However, it required another level of expertise when we wanted to look at creating custom reports that would go outside of those canned reports. We had it, but it just meant we had to put our thinking caps on. If the other teams, such as the server or the web team, wanted to do the same custom reports, their people would need to get trained on that because my team didn't have time to generate custom reports for other teams. The custom porting was very good, but it took an extra level of expertise that we needed to be trained on. An area of improvement would be to make the custom reports a little bit more intuitive and less scripting.

View full review »

Some of the graphics on Opsview could be improved.

View full review »

I am not close enough to know what my company's teams require more in the product.

Pricing and a few certain aspects in the solution needs to be improved. I don't know much since I am not involved in it.

View full review »

Reload time: Although there have been major gains in the time to process reloads, I think that there is still room for improvement in this area.

The major gains are between versions 5.0 and 5.2.. When ever you make a change or addition to to a host/interface you need to manually reload the system for the changes to be seen. The time it takes for the reload process to complete has decreased from about a minute to just over 30 seconds with just a small number of hosts (83) and then acknowledge the changes. You are reminded that you need to perform this action by a change of color of the Reload Menu item from Blue to Orange however you still have to wait for the system to reload before you can proceed to your next task.

My preference would be for this process to happen in the background so that I could move on to another task but still have the option to acknowledge or roll back the changes if need be.

View full review »

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing and customization. 

Maybe the graphical representation can be improved. It can be enhanced for better visualization. It could be a little better. And the graph center can be improved.

When it comes to additional features, some automation reports should be enabled, like CPU and memory. So I want to generate a report for all the servers. I need to know yesterday's average, minimum, and maximum CPU usage, as well as the minimum utilization on the servers.

I want to automate the report generation. It would be great if any product in our system can provide that functionality. It will be helpful for the customers.

View full review »

We are starting to hit the limits of how we can scale out. While the UI has always been snappy, it can take about 30 minutes from committing a configuration change to when that change is apparent in the UI, for example adding a service check to a host.

View full review »

There is one feature that I've been requesting for a while now. Going back to this multi-tenancy thing, right now the tenants can't create their own service checks, so that's still a process they have to get with us. Once we get a check in place, they can then utilize that check across all of their hosts. It's like a one-time thing to set that up with them. It would be nice if they could even implement their own service checks and there was some way to introduce that into the distributed system from a tenant perspective, not just a global admin perspective. That's one feature that I think is missing and I've mentioned it quite a few times to the guys over in their ops unit.

Another thing that we thought would be kind of neat, would be if there was some kind of integrated logging service. We've got this distributed system already in place and I know it's a monitoring service, but it would be kind of cool if there was something that could catch syslogs. It could have a module in there to view the syslogs from all of the different sites and use that as a syslog aggregate or something along those lines. It would be kind of like what Splunk does. If we could get that functionality inside of here, because we've already got all of these things around the world and if we could just leverage that to do this, then that would be kind of neat too.

View full review »

In a future release, we would like to have Observ for AI. Any AI and intelligence it can add to the monitoring is obviously beneficial. We would also like to have automated callouts. 

View full review »

In Opsview 4.6.3, there is no provision for making bulk changes to monitored servers via the GUI, though it is possible to custom-script bulk changes via the API. Some of this has been remedied in Opsview 5, released last Fall. I would also like to see the ability to export charts in graphic format, either PNG or JPG. Finally, the Keyword feature (renamed Hashtag in version 5) would be improved if it did not cascade from Service Check to Server and back--greater granularity would provide even more flexibility in assigning alerts to application owners.

View full review »

It's probably the priciest option of all its main competitors.

View full review »

The API provided by Opsview is, compared to other monitoring solutions, not state of the art. It would be great to see that more efforts would be put into this part of the product. Furthermore I would love to see support for more database systems which are needed for storing configuration stuff and data.

View full review »

I think it still has room for improvement to auto discovery. If you put the agent on a house, it has auto discovery. I also think it can be improved with VMware as well. It can be a little bit flaky with the agent on VMware.

It performs all the diversifications, but if you've got a VMware environment, there are some anomalies within the service checks. I don't know if that's because of plugins unfamiliar to VMware or if there's an actual issue with Opsview. Regardless, it's not as strong with VMware as it is with other devices.

View full review »

The graphing feature needs work, although it has been rewritten in release 5.0 and we have yet to deploy it.

View full review »

Opsview lacks few features. All of the areas we listed for improvement were implemented in version 5.

Nonetheless, if it were to become more than a super monitoring tool, I would wish for an integrated CMDB and call-logging module to create a standalone integrated IT service management system out of it. It has the potential!

View full review »

SNMP traps management to be improved. It's not so easy to use and you have to pay more to get the SMS module.

View full review »

Some aspects of the GUI functionality need improvement. We've discussed them with Opsview and they plan on making improvements per customer request.

View full review »

I wish they'd update the iOS app, which, I think, is the same version I used back in 2012 or so. It's always looked pretty much the same. As for the web version, things like the acknowledgements are better, but I'd rather use the iOS app because it's easier and quicker to acknowledge and schedule downtime.

Also, I took their training for the reporting module, and it's quite complicated. I'd like more functionality than just drag-and-drop to build a report, which we had to do with SQL queries. This is an area of that needs improvement because it requires that we have time for development time in order to do SQL queries.

I think, though, that pretty much everything else is great with the new version 5. We're able to add hosts and do other things so much easier than with the previous version. There's a massive improvement and I'm pretty happy with it.

View full review »

We're already evaluating v5.0 and to tell the truth, there's a couple of things that we found really useful in previous versions that for some reason they have removed. For example, in the current version, it's pretty easy to go into the host detail just by having a simple click into the host, but for some reason this has been removed in the new version. It was really good that you could just click on the name of the host and it took you to a more detailed view of the host itself or the item, and now that feature is gone in v5.0.

View full review »

I would like to see a bit more with the Jasper Reporting, but not a major issue.

View full review »

• Easier expansions
• Better documentations
• Having tabs inside, 2F authentication
• Incorrect documentation for version 5.0
• Lack of tabs in Opsview GUI
• Unnecessary configuration and manual setup for slave appliances which can be configured by Opsview inside the VM

View full review »

Hard to say, some minor changes could help improve ease of configuring (which have already been requested and are now on the roadmap). View full review »

MySQL

View full review »