We performed a comparison between Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista and Cisco DNA Center based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Management Applications solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I really like Visual RAF. I use that a lot and then I use the up and down status reports because it'll send me emails and text messages when access points go up or down. That way, I'm aware of what's going on."
"The reports are good."
"The most valuable feature of Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista is the monitoring of wired and wireless equipment."
"Network management solution that's very stable and scalable. It has a straightforward installation, fast technical support, and multiple features such as reporting, network health analysis, etc."
"Being able to see the health of the network is most valuable. It is very strong in terms of stability and scalability. Their technical support is also good."
"It is a good investment for features."
"It enables monitoring of various components such as access points, switch cards, and other elements within the company's solutions."
"I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"It offers automation, security enforcement, analytics, and integration with other Cisco technologies, making it a key driver for efficient network operations and compliance with security protocols."
"Has a good processing feature with a high level of accuracy."
"The monitoring features are very useful for network engineers."
"The solution helps in user microsegmentation."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"The location of the WiFi connection should be available to all users."
"Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista could improve by adding more cybersecurity features."
"They should add more security features."
"I would like to see a little better reporting, not reporting features, the report maker to be a little better."
"Adding a reliable and proper heatmap for the access points would make this solution better."
"It needs to be infused with more artificial intelligence and machine learning."
"Cisco DNA Center should improve its configuration management. It is better to have a dev version before pushing it."
"Integration with analytic tools and API integrations would be ideal."
"There should be an option for automation of template deployment by using the stored data. It is not easy to save configuration information for lots of devices without using other tools. There should be a tighter, better repository of information that can be merged with the templates."
"The solution needs to improve the dashboard."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"When it comes to deploying wireless fields, integrating defaults into the DNS interface can be challenging."
"Cisco DNA Center was a new technology for us, at the beginning, it was not easy to do, but Cisco did a lot of training with us to a level we could handle everything. The team is managing itself now without the assistance of Cisco."
"It seems to be a little bit more centered toward wireless than wired. You've got more options you can do wirelessly than you can with the wired switches, but it works for what we need it to do. We would like to see a little bit more about the traffic, and we're looking at what's out there to see about that. We are looking at something that might give us a bit more insight into the actual traffic. If they had the full functionality on the wired side, as they do on the wireless side in terms of being able to view traffic and everything, it would be good."
Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista is ranked 18th in Network Management Applications with 6 reviews while Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Management Applications with 37 reviews. Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista is rated 9.0, while Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista writes "Helpful support, useful monitoring, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista is most compared with Alcatel-Lucent ClearPass, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager and Aruba Airwave, whereas Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Juniper Mist Wired Assurance and Huawei eSight. See our Alcatel-Lucent OmniVista vs. Cisco DNA Center report.
See our list of best Network Management Applications vendors.
We monitor all Network Management Applications 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.
