When selecting a provider for Qualys VMDR, users display varied preferences. Many opt for Amazon Web Services (AWS) due to its capabilities and services. Others choose Microsoft Azure, appreciating its integration features. A portion of users prefers alternatives not specified within major brands. Overall, AWS and Azure are popular choices, with a notable segment also selecting different platforms outside the mainstream options for their cloud needs.

Users advise others to ensure proper network identification and secure management approval, document procedures, and engage in training. They emphasize leveraging authenticated scans and server inventories. They recommend comprehensive evaluation through a proof of concept and consulting experts if needed. They highlight the importance of exploring features and testing in a lab environment. Many users suggest utilizing Qualys VMDR's cloud functionalities for effective vulnerability assessments, appreciating its simplicity and effectiveness.

<p>Qualys VMDR provides comprehensive vulnerability management and automated patch management features that enhance security operations.</p>

<p>The platform offers robust vulnerability detection capabilities and integrates seamlessly with other systems such as ServiceNow for efficient incident management.</p>

<p>Continuous monitoring and regular scheduled scanning enable proactive threat detection and quick response, minimizing vulnerability exposure.</p>

<p>Vulnerability assessments are detailed and frequently updated, helping to prioritize and remediate threats based on current global intelligence.</p>

<p>Automated remediation workflows streamline the mitigation process, allowing for efficient response to identified vulnerabilities.</p>

Qualys VMDR is celebrated for its high stability. Many users have not experienced issues, though a few have noted minor bugs related to reporting and occasional scheduled downtimes. It handles monthly scans effectively without disruption. Users rate its stability highly, usually between eight and nine out of ten. Some noticed sluggishness with large data volumes, but generally, its performance remains impressive, making it a reliable tool for detecting vulnerabilities.

Qualys VMDR users cite issues with ticket management, cloud exclusivity, and high costs for on-premise options. Improvements are needed for server administration, overly granular reporting, and interface simplification. The vulnerability database has occasional false positives, while asset tagging is complex. Patch management lacks accuracy, impacting older systems. Users desire enhanced custom reporting, better API speed, reduced false positives, and improved integration with third parties. Improved user interface and customer support are also sought, as is pricing competitiveness.

Users have utilized Qualys VMDR for periods ranging from a few months to over 15 years.

Companies primarily use Qualys VMDR for vulnerability management, scanning, and reporting across hybrid environments. It aids in continuous monitoring, asset inventory, and compliance checks on-premises and in cloud deployments. Organizations leverage it for scanning web applications, container security, policy compliance, and integrating with network infrastructure. It provides comprehensive visibility of vulnerabilities in various devices, including servers, workstations, and web applications. Qualys VMDR helps prioritize patch management and risk mitigation efforts.

Qualys VMDR excels in vulnerability management, continuous monitoring, and policy compliance. Its cloud-based interface enhances scalability and ease of use. The platform features advanced asset management, threat intelligence integration, customizable dashboards, and automated remediation workflows. Users appreciate its robust report generation, patch management, flexible prioritization, intuitive design, and comprehensive threat detection. With seamless integration capabilities and precise vulnerability assessments, it efficiently categorizes vulnerabilities by severity, aiding in risk mitigation. Its comprehensive knowledge base further enhances user experience.

Users evaluated Nessus, Rapid7, Tenable, OpenVAS, iDefense, McAfee Vulnerability Manager, Microsoft Defender, Nmap, Metasploit, Foundstone, and Forescout before choosing Qualys VMDR. Some opted for Qualys due to comprehensive features, effective proof of concept, automated mitigation, or integration ease. Others switched from McAfee or used third-party assessments before transitioning. Some found Qualys better than competitors and valued its information security and compliance capabilities. Participants frequently compared usability, interface, and user-friendliness.

Qualys VMDR demonstrates strong scalability attributes, frequently praised for its cloud-based architecture which facilitates seamless scaling across multiple environments. Users report handling large networks and numerous assets efficiently without significant issues. The ability to dynamically add resources enhances its adaptability, and the platform supports scalability with auto-scaling capabilities and asset grouping. Rating assessments often place its scalability capabilities between eight to nine out of ten, indicating high satisfaction and reliability.

Organizations have improved security posture through higher scan frequency and automated processes. Qualys VMDR enables tracking and prioritizing vulnerabilities, aiding quick remediation. With comprehensive asset visibility, teams efficiently manage risk and generate valuable reports for executive management. Organizations benefit from enhanced threat detection, automatic updates, and cost reduction by internalizing vulnerability management. Real-time knowledge base updates provide timely information, improving response to zero-day vulnerabilities and supporting streamlined operations across diverse environments.

Users chose HPE StoreOnce for cost-effectiveness, integration with HP, deduplication, ease of use, and strong support and reputation.

Users considered alternatives like EMC Data Domain, Quantum, Dell, IBM, and Symantec. StoreOnce was often chosen due to its cost-effectiveness, integration with existing infrastructure, and strong support. Some users preferred it for deduplication and recovery capabilities. Others switched from older backup systems or found StoreOnce to be a strategic fit with their existing HP environment. Many emphasized ease of use, pricing, and comprehensive support from HP as significant factors in their decision.

Users preferred Adobe Experience Manager for its features and support, surpassing simpler systems and offering complex capabilities.

Users considered alternatives to Adobe Experience Manager like Drupal, Joomla, WordPress, IBM, ContentSquare, Sitecore, Storyblok, Typos3, Magnolia, Liferay, SharePoint, OpenText TeamSite, and customized tools. They found Adobe Experience Manager offered more features and advantages. Companies appreciate its multilingual capabilities and integration with marketing tools. Many migrated from tools like TeamSite due to its complexity. Despite exploring other options, Adobe Experience Manager's comprehensive functionality and trusted reputation often influenced the final decision.

Users favored Qualys VMDR for its integrated, user-friendly interface, cost-effectiveness, automation, and detailed reporting against alternatives.

Users considered various options before adopting Qualys VMDR. They evaluated solutions like Nessus, Rapid7, Tenable, McAfee Vulnerability Manager, and Microsoft Defender. Many had prior experience with these products, noting issues such as high cost, manual processes, lack of scalability, or inadequate results. While some were already using Qualys due to its comprehensive features and cost-effectiveness, others explored alternatives like Kenna, RiskSense, Forescout, OpenVAS, Metasploit, and iDefense.

Organizations favored Black Duck for ease, scalability, and database, considering alternatives due to support and documentation issues.

Black Duck's implementation varies, with internal or external processes, expert involvement enhances efficiency, and premium services praise skilled support.

{"quote":"However, for new technologies, there are better tools available.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"I recommend Black Duck for those using native languages like C and C++.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"There are areas for improvement such as false positives and the scanning of containers.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"3"}

Black Duck's setup is simple via cloud but on-premise needs resources; maintenance is manageable once deployed.

8.0

8.5

{"quote":"The automated code scanning feature and Black Duck's integration with our development tools have enhanced our software compliance process and overall audit readiness.","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"8"}

Users primarily deploy Black Duck on-premises or private cloud, with flexibility and scalability driving diverse cloud strategy choices.

Black Duck offers responsive support, but users report delays and variability in satisfaction, especially during peak times and across time zones.

6.35

Black Duck is scalable and integrates well with CI/CD, though costs and flexibility vary with organizational needs and user numbers.

Black Duck ensures open source compliance and security by analyzing vulnerabilities and integrating with CI/CD pipelines in software projects.

Black Duck needs improved integration, scan speed, setup, user experience, documentation, pricing, reporting, APIs, project handling, and customer interaction.

Black Duck offers robust vulnerability scanning and seamless integration, ensuring efficient open-source compliance and security in DevOps environments.

Evaluate if Black Duck's strong compliance suits your needs; it's costly but integrates well, challenging onboarding needs expert support.

Black Duck has been utilized by users for varying periods, ranging from one to seven years, indicating long-term satisfaction.

{"quote":"There are some pain points with the response time and first-level support quality.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Their technical support is good.","score":"8"}

Black Duck pricing varies by user count or code size, offering free integrations and training with costs from $10,000.

Users find Black Duck stable and reliable, with minor GUI delays and transition bugs, but no significant stability issues.

Companies are considering switching from Black Duck to cheaper options like Snyk for better vulnerability scanning and blockchain evaluation.

<p>Black Duck auto analyzes components and offers extensive scanning capabilities for robust security risk management. It integrates seamlessly into environments to scan Docker and open-source software while identifying license issues and consolidating component use. However, it lacks integration with IntelliJ IDEA, the scanner can be slow, prices are high, documentation is scattered, and as a cloud-only solution, code must be uploaded, potentially inconvenient for those preferring on-prem options.</p>

{"quote":"Improvements in reporting capabilities.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"The ability to export the mitigations that are provided is needed.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"There are areas for improvement such as false positives and the scanning of containers.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"It provides insights into legal issues, security risks, operational risks, and license risks.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The software composition analysis is most effective for security risk management.","score":"9"}

Before using Black Duck, users primarily relied on different security tools and had no specific approach for operational risk and compliance. Some compared Black Duck to SonarQube, Checkmarx, and FossID, finding it superior in deployment and vulnerability databases. Black Duck was the first tool for many, although some users considered switching to WhiteSource. Experience with FOSSA was also mentioned. Overall, Black Duck became essential for security and compliance across their organizations.

<p>Black Duck pricing is high compared to competitors, which can be a deterrent for companies that don't scan frequently.</p><p>Black Duck integration with IntelliJ IDEA and other development tools is limited, hampering workflow efficiency.</p><p>Customers express concern over Black Duck's cloud-only nature, desiring an on-premise option for enhanced security and flexibility.</p><p>Black Duck's scanning speed and results consistency can be improved, affecting DevSecOps integration and deployment.</p><p>Integration between Coverity and Black Duck Hub lacks seamlessness, and a unified offering would benefit companies that depend on both tools.</p>

Enterprise buyers evaluating Black Duck find varied pricing models, ranging from $10,000 to $70,000 based on users or code size. Many find the solution expensive, suggesting knowing code size for optimal negotiation. Licensing includes access to the academy with free integrations. Some features carry extra costs, yet high capacity needs elevate overall expenses. While many commend the product’s licensing compliance, some consider alternatives like WhiteSource for smaller organizations due to pricing concerns.

<p>Black Duck surpasses its competitors by offering comprehensive open-source vulnerability management, enforcing license compliance, and unparalleled security risk assessment that ensures efficient and reliable software development.</p>

Black Duck's initial setup is generally straightforward, especially on cloud platforms like Azure and Google Cloud. Deployment complexity varies by scale, requiring either on-premises setup or SaaS solutions. Users find it easy to install on the cloud, but on-premises may involve challenges with documentation and integration. Setup times vary from minutes to weeks, and deployment often requires minimal personnel. Users note simplicity if using the cloud but highlight manual efforts for on-premises configurations.

Some implement Black Duck internally, while others opt for external help. External setups sometimes face challenges and delays, but experts can facilitate the process. Many choose premium support, and maintenance is typically managed by the vendor. Users often wait for supplier implementation before starting to use Black Duck.

Customers express mixed experiences with Black Duck's customer service. Some find the technical support professional and responsive, while others note significant delays. The response time is generally seen as quick, but some users face challenges due to a complex process. The support team is praised for resolving issues effectively, though overlapping work weeks and priority handling could improve. Training videos and unique features are appreciated, although deeper technical issues might require more expertise.

Users advise others to clarify if a user-based or code-based model suits their organization. It can become complex if the team size fluctuates. Integration may be challenging, and migrating hubs is inefficient. Provisioning space is essential. Black Duck is reputable and effective for seasoned users, though support is costly. Onboarding can be difficult, requiring attention to expert hours. Those adopting native languages find it beneficial. It excels in compliance management and integrates well into CI/CD pipelines.

Black Duck offers good scalability for both small and large organizations, although its capacity may be influenced by licensing and hardware limitations. Users mention it handles varying user numbers across departments and integrates well with CI/CD tools. Cloud deployment supports flexibility, while pricing policies can pose challenges for temporary resource expansion. Generally, Black Duck adapts well to enterprise needs, but scalability might require additional resource allocation as user numbers increase.

Black Duck experiences diverse deployment approaches with on-premises being frequently selected, showcasing in several entities. Some opt for private cloud counterparts, while others choose public cloud environments. Hybrid cloud usage is relatively less but still present among a few.

Black Duck needs enhanced integration with more tools like IntelliJ IDEA. Users experience issues with large scans, reporting, and user interface limitations. The setup process is complex, documentation is scattered, and pricing is seen as high. Flexibility in the user interface, improved scanning efficiency, reporting clarity, and consistency in identifying vulnerabilities are also needed. Users desire on-premise options, better API access, and streamlined dependency management for improved usability and effectiveness.

Black Duck is regarded as stable by many users, showing reliability without crashes, freezes, or significant bugs. While response delays may occur depending on the browser, these are deemed typical for applications. Users suggest consistent performance with effective administrative practices like cleanup and archiving. Transitioning from different tools may present bugs, yet users rate stability highly, often above seven on a scale of ten, reinforcing trust in Black Duck's performance.

Black Duck excels in vulnerability scanning with seamless Docker integration. Users appreciate its automatic component analysis, extensive knowledge base, effective binary file scanning, and open-source compliance checking. Its user-friendly interface facilitates easy pipeline integration, while policy and license management enhance its functionality. Dependency tree visualization aids in pinpointing issues. The platform supports strong security, stability, and integration across technologies and application stacks, boasting a comprehensive database for managing security and compliance risks.

<p>Black Duck auto analyzes components, highlighting developers' efforts from an intellectual property perspective.</p>
<p>It offers extensive vulnerability scanning which is easy for users to handle.</p>
<p>Black Duck seamlessly integrates to scan Docker binary files, presenting immediate updates on new vulnerabilities.</p>
<p>It provides comprehensive scans and evaluations of open-source software, enhancing security risk management.</p>
<p>Installation of Black Duck is notably straightforward, enhancing user experience with minimal setup effort.</p>

Users have experienced Black Duck for a range of one to seven years.

<p>Organizations primarily use Black Duck for software composition analysis, vulnerability and operational risk assessment, and license compliance in development and audit processes. It aids in scanning source code, detecting compliance issues, and identifying vulnerabilities in open-source and commercial software components. Common integrations include CI/CD pipelines and DevSecOps environments. Teams leverage it during due diligence in M&amp;A, scanning open-source software, and ensuring security management across multiple sectors such as banking, retail, and energy.</p>

<p>Users evaluated alternatives to Black Duck including WhiteSource, Checkmarx, Snyk, and FOSSA due to cost considerations and feature needs like vulnerability scanning and database strength. They sought tools for license, component, and policy management. They desired a product fitting everyday requirements and considered open-source options. They explored tools specific to certain technologies for possible substitution. Some did not proceed with FOSSA, selecting Black Duck for its comprehensive knowledge base.</p>

Alteryx became popular due to its user-friendly interface, enhanced performance, scalability, security, and broad capabilities over previous tools.

Alteryx implementations were efficient, often in-house with few trained staff, occasionally starting with consultants, and quickly completed.

Alteryx offers a simple, user-friendly setup with intuitive drag-and-drop features and efficient installation, often under an hour.

Most Alteryx users prefer on-premises, while fewer choose public cloud, and only a few select private or hybrid cloud.

Alteryx provides responsive customer service via an active online community and personalized assistance for complex technical issues.

{"quote":"It has also made deploying new workflows quicker, taking only five to ten minutes to move to production.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"8"}

{"quote":"Alteryx has helped save costs compared to Informatica licenses. It's one of the primary reasons people are migrating to tools like Alteryx that can easily do the work of more costly popular tools.","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"9"}

Alteryx is used for data preparation, blending, automation, and analytics across various industries like finance and logistics.

{"quote":"Alteryx is more cost-effective compared to Informatica licenses, offering savings.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"8"}

{"quote":"Alteryx is somewhat user-friendly and easier to work with compared to Informatica PowerCenter.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Make sure to improve the documentation for recurring issues.","score":"7"}

8.15

Alteryx is scalable and flexible for enterprises, though some users have concerns about costs and very large data sets.

8.5

Users recommend a free trial of Alteryx, emphasizing ease of use, community support, and efficient data transformations.

Alteryx offers user-friendly, no-code data blending, predictive analytics, and integration with Python and R for versatile data processing.

{"quote":"Alteryx is user-friendly and allows easy creation of workflows compared to Informatica PowerCenter.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"9"}

Alteryx needs better UI, training, pricing, cloud functionality, and advanced machine learning features to improve competitiveness.

Alteryx is stable and efficient for big-data analysis, with high ratings despite occasional bugs and slower server performance.

A majority of users have utilized Alteryx for durations ranging from one to five years.

Alteryx offers high ROI by automating processes quickly, saving time and reducing costs, despite varying individual results.

Alteryx, though costly, is preferred by larger enterprises for its ROI and time-saving value, with trial options available.

Users evaluated several tools, favoring Alteryx for ease of use and analytics, despite RapidMiner's ETL limitations and SAS's cost.

Alteryx enhances productivity by automating workflows, improving decision-making, and integrating seamlessly for fast, accurate data analysis.

{"quote":"I didn't need to reach out to Alteryx for support because available documents usually provide enough information to resolve issues.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"There haven't been significant downtimes.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Alteryx is more cost-effective compared to Informatica licenses, offering savings.","score":"9"}

<p>Alteryx serves as a comprehensive data management tool enabling seamless data preparation, blending, prediction, and optimization within one workflow. Known for robust predictive modeling and powerful spatial analysis tools, it enhances decision-making efficiency. Yet, it presents a steep learning curve, high pricing, and lacks in data visualization, relying on tools like Tableau. Text functions and integration with third-party tools need improvement, and performance issues arise with large files.</p>

{"quote":"You can see the intermediate results in workflows, which is very helpful.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The inbuilt functions are good, and it's useful for working with files.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Alteryx is user-friendly and allows easy creation of workflows compared to Informatica PowerCenter.","score":"9"}

Users transitioned from a variety of tools before Alteryx, including Informatica, SPSS Modeler, SAS Analytics, Oracle BI, SSIS, Talend, KNIME, Microsoft System Servers, R, Python, SQL, JMP, Excel, and IDEA. Alteryx was favored for its user-friendly interface, ease of use, comprehensive features, and speed of deployment compared to other tools like DataIQ, RapidMiner, and Informatica PowerCenter, which were more complex or had steeper learning curves.

<p>Alteryx surpasses its competitors by offering intuitive data blending and advanced analytics automation, which enhances user productivity and decision-making efficiency with seamless integration and collaborative capabilities that empower data professionals.</p>

<p>Alteryx has a steep learning curve and lacks e-learning resources, making it challenging for non-technical users.</p>
<p>Pricing is considered high, with significant jumps between license tiers and expensive server options.</p>
<p>Alteryx lacks advanced data visualization capabilities, requiring integration with external tools like Tableau.</p>
<p>There are limited pre-built tools for predictive analytics, necessitating custom tool development.</p>
<p>Alteryx's deep learning model support and data science features are seen as insufficient compared to competitors.</p>

Alteryx pricing is considered expensive, particularly for small to medium-sized enterprises. A single Alteryx Designer license costs approximately $5,200 annually, although discounts are available for longer-term commitments. Server solutions are significantly higher, necessitating substantial investment for enterprise-scale deployment. Users often advise starting with the 14-day trial to evaluate needs, as costs can quickly escalate if multiple licenses are required. Despite the costs, Alteryx delivers significant value and ROI, particularly for larger organizations.

Implementation of Alteryx is often handled in-house by trained staff, with vendor support noted for being proficient. Many choose not to engage consultants or integrators, finding the process straightforward. Some organizations, like Vodafone Group, utilized central support teams. Team size varies from a few to 10 professionals, influenced by project size and use cases. Optimal architecture selection can simplify deployment and maintenance, often requiring minimal personnel for upkeep.

Users express satisfaction with Alteryx customer service and support, highlighting its responsiveness, knowledgeability, and robust community. The community offers extensive resources for troubleshooting. Direct contact with technical support is not always necessary due to comprehensive documentation. Ratings vary; some note waiting times and recent changes in support model impacting experience. International partners contribute to support, enhancing responses in various time zones. Client service is generally seen as quick and helpful, ensuring satisfactory experiences.