• GravelPieceOfSword@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    Splunk is already very expensive to be honest, with their policy of charging based on indexed logs (hit by searches) as opposed to used logs, and the necessity for a lot of logs to be indexed for 'in case something breaks '. Bit of hearsay there - while I don’t work for the team that manages indexing, I have had quite a few conversations with our internal team.

    I was surprised we were moving from splunk to a lesser known proprietary competitor (we tried and gave up on elasticsearch years ago). Splunk is much more powerful for power users , but the cost of the alternative was 7-10 times less, and most users didn’t unfortunately use splunk power user functionality to justify using it over the competitor.

    Being a power user with lots of dashboards, my team still uses splunk for now, and I have background conversations to make sure we don’t lose it, I think Cisco would lose out if they jacked up prices, I think they’d add value to their infrastructure offerings using splunk as an additional value add perhaps?

    • xmunk@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      9 months ago

      With the acquisition my concern partially lies in cost but is more focused on quality. Cisco does big expensive stuff with big expensive certifications. I’m concerned they’ll try to enterprise and make HIPAA compliant and (add insane features here) with the result being a quickly degrading customer experience.

      My company has developers a plenty - but we also have a lot of less technical people who give our platform value… splunk makes our logs accessible and usable to those people without requiring a technical liason.

      I’m concerned with needing to divert developers (and like, senior ones that have a lot of trust) to find better solutions or, god forbid, try to roll our own.