Lenel Favorability Results 2017

By Brian Rhodes, Published Feb 09, 2017, 12:00pm EST

At this point, it is not surprising that Lenel is one of the most disliked security manufacturers. From stories like Lenel Partners Angry, Lenel Does Not Care comes a clear, strong theme: Lenel's star has fallen, and in the opinion of many, crashed.

Continuing our series of manufacturer favorability results, we asked integrators to comment on Lenel, and they have with strongly negative sentiment.

In this note, they detail the reasons they dislike the brand, and they describe the increasing trend of ripping out and replacing Lenel.

Lenel *******

******* **** **** *********** **** a **** ********** ** the *****, ******* **** the ****** ** *** surveyed ******:

** * ***** ** comparison, *****'* *** -**% was *** ***** **** even*********'* **** *** -*% results.

******* ********* ********* ***** major ******* *** ****: Bad *******, **** ******, and *********. ********** ******** colors ***** ***** ****** in *** ******** **** follow:

Pockets ** ***** ************ ****

*** *** ********* ************ ***** as * *** ************ with **** ***********. **** strongly ******** ********* ***** listed ** ***** **** positive *****. ******** ******** generally ********* *** *********** of***** ****** *******, *** *** *** ***** or ********** *****. * ******** of ********, ********* ***** with ***** ************* ****, gave ******** ******** ******** feedback:

"***** ***** *** ******* real **** ** ******** in ***** ********** ** the ******* ***** **** exist. *** ******* ** mature *** *** ********** coming *** ** ** real ****** ****** *** markets. ***'* ************* ****!!"
"** * ***'* ***** VAR, ** ** * ton **** ***** ****. Their **** *** *********, professional, *** **** **********. Their ******* ** ***** the **** ** *** market *** ********** ************."
"***** ****** ******* ** a **** *** ** for ***** ******** *** no ********* ***** ***** access ******* *******/"
"* ***** **** **** an *********** ***** *** I ***** **** *** still ***** ** *** ACS ****."
"***** ****** ******* ** still *** ** *** best ******** ** *** enterprise ******."
"******* ** ***** *** UTC ** ******* ** excellent *** **** *** willing ** **** *** price ** *** * project ****, *** ******* is ********* **** *** sales/technical ****."

*******, *** ******** ** sentiment *** * ****** mix ** **********, ***********, and * ***** **** Lenel's **** ***** *** behind **:

Bad *******

*** ********* ******** ***** was *****'* **** ******* to ******* ***** ****** support ** ****** ******, much **** **** ******** efforts **** ****** **** support. ******* ***** **** not ** * **** job ** **** *** many ** **'* ****, and *** ******** ********** has ***** * *** toll ** *** *************:

"*** ***** ************ ** work **** ** ***. Everything **** *** ******* to ******** ** *** are ********."
"****** **** ** ***** adapter ** ***** *** its *********** ****** ** is ******* *** *** decimated *** ******* **** with **** ********* ******* and ***** ******** ******* / *******. ******* **, 100 *** *** ******* have **** ********* ** rip *** ******* **** anything ****."
"****** ********* ** **** with. ** ** **** they *** ***** *** a ***** ** **** with ***."
"*******: ******** ******* ** terrible, **** ***** ******* & ******* ******* (**** sales & *******), **** not **** *** **** anything *** ** ***."
"***** ** *****. *** best ******* ** *** market, ******* ********, *** some ** *** ***** support ***'** **** ********."
"** ** ******* *** has ********* *** ******* line **** **** ********* support *** ***** ******** support / *******."
"***, ****** ******* **** UTC ** ****"
"** ******* *** *** run ********** ** ***, in **** ****. ******* works"
"******* (*********) ** ****** get *** **** ******* for *** *******, ** is *******, *********, **** of ********** ********* (***** not **** *********)."
"**** *******, **** *** updated *******. **** *********."
"***** ******* ** ********, UTCification ** ********** ****"
"***** ******** ******* *** dropped ************* **** *** years ** **** **** gotten ********** **** ***** market **********."

High ******

******* *** ********* *** the **** **** ** Lenel's ******** *** ******** compared ** *** **** of *** ******. *** only ****, *** ******* comments ******** ******* ** too **** *** **** is ******* ** *** company, ******* * ******* sense ** ******* ***** dealers ********** ** **** ongoing ******* ** ********** to ******** *********:

"*** ****, ***** ********** has **** **** *** toilet. **** **** *********. Only ** * *** a ****** **** * large ******** ***** ****** would * ******** ****."
"***** ***** ***** **** and *********** *** *********. "
" ************ ******** **** are *** *** ******. I *** **** * major ******** *** ****** they "****** *** **** you ** *****"."
"** ** **** **** expensive ******* ***** *********."
"***'* ***. ***** *** high"
"********* *********** **** *** poor *********** ** *** features."
"**** ****** *** **** you ** **** ******** recieves"
"***** **** **** ***** for **** ****** *** poor **************."
"*** ********** *** ****** not ******* **** *** although * ** *** dealer * **** **** customers *** ****** **** never ****** **** ****."

***** *********

******, *** ***** ****** complaint *** *****'* ******* indifference *** ********* ** working **** ****. **** cited *** ******* ********* 'smaller' ******* ** ******** out ** ******* ** routine *************, *** *** company *** **** *** initiative ** ******* **** its ******** ******* ** win ** ****** ********:

"**** **** ** *** next *****. ***** ** the *** ** *** Access ******* **** ***** made **** ******** *** arrogant. ** ***** ** become * ****** * few ***** **** ******* we *** * *** of ******* **** **** them *** **** **** unhappy **** *** ******* their ***** *********** **** providing *** **** **** not **** ****** *** calls. *** ** *** taking **** ***** ******* with *******'* ******** ** a ******* *****."
"*** ***** ***, * admired *****. **** **** smart ****** **** * great ********. * ****** arrogance *** ********* ******* they **** ** ********** and ****** ********. ***** smart ****** *** *** gone, *** ***** ******** is ****, *** *** that ** **** ** the *********."
"********* ** **** **** at ***** *** ***** to ** ********."
"********* *********** **** *** poor *********** ** *** features."
"************* **** *** ***** quite ******* *** ***** staff ** *** **** to * **** ******** any ******. ** ******* that ***** ******** **** no ****** **** ** fill *** **** ****...** never *** *** ***...**** this ****."
"**** **** ***** ** one ****** *** ** a *** ** ******** every **** **** ****. And *** ******* ***'* exactly ***'* **** ** access *******."
"** ****** ** **** care ** *******."

Outlook *** *****

** ** *** ****. Multiple ******** ******** *************** reaching * ***** ** no ****** **** ****, and ***** ***** ** now ** ***********. *** example, ********** ****** *********** *** ***** *** Keyscan - *** *******? *** ******** ************ **** common. ** ***** *** not ************ * ******** and ******** ******, **** should. *** **** ****, it ** ** ****** a ******** ** ** Lenel *** **** ****** around, *** ****** *** will **** ** ** replace **:

" *'** ***** *** a ***** **** **** is ***** **** ***** system ** ** ** good *** ** ***** I'm *** * ***** dealer. ** ****** *** must ******** *** ******** I ***. ****** * am ******* **** ****** who *** *** ******* to ******* **."
"* **** **** ********* who ****** **** ***** locked **** ****. * am ****** ******* *** offer * ************* **** source ***********"
"** ** * *** of *****-*** ****** ******* systems ***** ** *** REMOVING *****."
"* **** ***** **** frustration **** ********* **** use *****."
"***'* *** *****, **** replaced * *** ******* and *** ******* **** to **** *** ********* better **** *****"
"**** ** **** **** their *******."
"***** ** **** * poor ********** *** ******* (and ********* *******) *** have ***** **** ***** are ******* ** ******* it. **** *** *** and ****** *******."
"** **** ***** **** that ** ****** * Lenel ***, ***** ** have * *** ** misunderstandings **** **** *** with ***-*****, ***."
"***, ***, *** *****. They *** ****** ** old ****** *** ****** to ** *** ****."

Comments (7)

Undisclosed #1

02/10/17 02:59am

A few things -

I enjoy the fact that you use direct quotes from the surveys, including spelling/grammatical errors. That certainly adds a few grains of salt to any opinions I read.
One of my comments appears on there and it is not positive at all, so I'm far from a Lenel cheerleader. But, I don't think anyone should be able to comment on Lenel that isn't either a Lenel dealer or a Lenel end-user. Anyone who says it's "not God's gift to access control", respectfully, either doesn't have the slightest idea what they are talking about or they simply don't understand the purpose of a system like Lenel. They'd probably have similar comments about Software House. I actually would wait with bated breath on what their recommended access control system would be. Countdown to "Infinias" in 3....2....1....
There is no denying that their technical support has been utterly putrid recently. However, I know first-hand that it has improved considerably. It's still not good enough, but it has improved to the point that it no longer makes me want to set every panel on fire.
I couldn't help but laugh at someone talking about "ripping and replacing" Lenel or someone offering a "open-source" replacement. Because yeah, nothing like trusting the basis of your physical security to an open-source software! Sounds like a great idea!

Ross Vander Klok

IPVMU Certified | 02/13/17 02:09pm

Their tech support has indeed improved from what it was and they have gone on a hiring spree to try to rebuild the department, but it is still woefully inadequate and will remain that way for some time. Lenel is way to complicated and immense to get up to speed in anything less than 6 months. Probably more like a year or two.

I figure they have a long road ahead of them to get to where they should be. I am hoping they can last that long and not slash other departments to continue funding tech support.

Undisclosed Integrator #2

02/16/17 04:49pm

We all have different strategies and markets, which is why there are so many choices and opinions. I see a lot of companies trying to fit square pegs into round holes. The depth of selections allow me to chose a system that meets the needs of my strategies and markets.

Just like cameras, (see Integrator's Top Selling Cameras 2017) we used to sell a lot of Axis and apparently most of the people out there are selling Axis (see the survey), but now we don't sell it very much. This is mainly due to the fact that it is sold literally "everywhere" (even at Walmart.com). It became a commodity and off the shelf box item. Anyone can get Axis and and watch all the youtube videos of how to install and set up. It is the DIY of the security industry. I don't fight it - I accept it and adjust my strategies.

Regarding Lenel

1. yes - there have been some issues with support in the past and a few still today. But we are starting to see strong improvement in this area. One key thing is that they are listening to us - which they did not seem to do a year ago.

2. Some "costs" issues we run into is with small or medium systems wanting "no annual license fees".

3. The big costs and competitive issue we have with Lenel is the video integration. OnGuard video is weak, but to integrate "other VMS" pushes the cost up too much. Customers want to add more cameras, more video analytics, LPR, etc. Yes they are still adding doors of access, but video is a faster growing market. We have many customers with "other" VMS integrated into Lenel and they LOVE it. Some video integration is extremely impressive (Milestone, Genetec, ExacqVision, etc). But the cost is an issue, since we have to double purchase licenses (license for VMS and license for Lenel).

2017 seems to be a year of change for Lenel / UTC. Will be curious to see if the constant improvements and the "wanting to improve" - we are currently experiencing will continue. Also, to see if they can catch up with some of the market trending concerns (web client, video integration, database management, lower cost professional services, more "free" items, etc.)

Undisclosed Manufacturer #3

02/16/17 05:14pm

Anyone looking to replace Lenel software only has to contact Mercury Security to obtain a fine list of valid, cost effective software companies that OEM the exact same Mercury Hardware.

1.Convert the Database

2.Install the New Software

3.Reflash the Firmware to the panels

4.Conversion Complete

5. 80% of Initial Investment is Saved in Place with the exact same state of the art hardware.

Magic being performed weekly.

Rian Schermerhorn

02/16/17 05:50pm

It was touched on above, but I'd think that responses and opinions will vary greatly depending on whether or not an integrator is a Lenel VAR or not. Every company has issues, but I personally have seen people go from devout Lenel haters while competing with them to a 180-deg shift and loving them once they moved to a company that was a VAR.

For just about any product that has a tightly controlled VAR / dealer channel, responses will almost always be more accurate if the responders are current -- or at least recently former -- VARs / dealers for the product. Products that are widely accessible, like cameras, or really anything available through general distribution, won't matter with regard to who's responding.

My 2 cents...

John Honovich

IPVM | In reply to Rian Schermerhorn | 02/16/17 08:58pm

For just about any product that has a tightly controlled VAR / dealer channel, responses will almost always be more accurate

While that is certainly true, the fact that Lenel suffers such ill-will is still an issue and should not be discounted, especially since many of the comments come from Lenel dealers and partners, e.g., Lenel Partners Angry, Lenel Does Not Care.

As a specific counter example here, Avigilon is a tightly controlled channel and they have created significant ill-will but their favorability rating are the mirror opposite of Lenel's (note Avigilon results not released yet but written / tabulated).

Brandon Knutson

IPVMU Certified | 02/16/17 07:58pm

As a former Lenel end-user I found OnGuard to be bloated and rather old feeling. It worked well for me (powerful features), but it was a demanding relationship and I did have to rely on my Lenel VAR to keep it running smoothly.

Read this IPVM report for free.

This article is part of IPVM's 6,741 reports, 909 tests and is only available to members. To get a one-time preview of our work, enter your work email to access the full article.