We performed a comparison between BigFix and Red Hat Satellite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"The solution is easy to use and it has good performance."
"Stable product that's easy to set up compared to other MDM products."
"The most valuable features in Microsoft Intune for me are application deployment, Defender deployment, and asset management."
"The ability to send configurations to our systems is valuable, particularly as we don't have a regular Windows AD server. Our current environment doesn't have a Windows AD, which limits our ability to push GPOs. However, this is where the solution can step in and help us push policies."
"It is helpful for managing devices anytime and any place without requiring dependency on the local networks."
"The feature I like the most is that we can perform remote tasks. If we want to retire or wipe out personal data or corporate data from a device, we can use Microsoft Intune remotely, and with the click of a button, data is removed automatically. Nothing needs to be done from the end-user side."
"I like that we can implement conditional access."
"What I like most is that it is a powerful solution."
"Almost every feature is wonderful in BigFix. It is very stable, and we can rely on it. It is an awesome tool."
"I like the inventory and life cycle management feature."
"BigFix helped us to identify the compliance of devices and has also improved the way that we manage our software inventory for reporting to vendors."
"It's good for reporting hardware and software."
"All the vendor patches are synchronized automatically."
"We rely on BigFix as part of our consulting engagements. It's more efficient from a visibility and discovery standpoint on the initial phase, the consulting engagement. It also increases our efficiencies on the remediation phase of our engagements."
"We've had no issues with stability."
"The product is convenient to use."
"It plays a significant role in managing the lifecycle of our systems and ensures that we can effectively control and update the software versions to align with our organization's needs."
"It cuts down significantly on the administrative time it takes to patch systems in a large environment."
"The most valuable features of Red Hat Satellite are its support, simplicity, and patch management."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"Technical support has been good."
"The product's most valuable feature is its ability to process patching and updates completely offline without an internet connection."
"Patch management is, for sure, most valuable. For license management and patch management, I would rate it a 10 out of 10."
"Lacking in features such as Wi-Fi and network security."
"It would be nice to have a location tracker for the mobile device management tool. I'm not sure if it exists but hasn't been configured or if it's missing, but we've been unable to utilize the location features."
"We would like to see support for Chrome and/or devices for Chromebooks."
"Microsoft Intune needs to improve the initial login process."
"One big problem with Microsoft is that they're changing the names of the products quite often, or they're quite consistently doing so. Intune is now Endpoint administration. Constantly switching the user interface or the administrative interface makes it quite hard to keep pace. If you are on a two-week holiday and you come back and look at the same screen you have looked at for the last couple of months, it looks different, which is annoying. Changing things around all the time doesn't make it easy."
"In the next release, I would like a feature to be able to properly lock down the device. For example, if an attacker or somebody steals the phone, you can be sure that the pin cannot be broken."
"It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation."
"They should improve its compatibility with other operating systems such as iOS and Linux. It supports Linux but they still need to work on the iOS part."
"I would like to see more custom content."
"The main shortcoming of BigFix was integration with vulnerability management. If you had a vulnerability in your software and BigFix on the endpoint, you needed integration with Qualys, Tenable, or another vulnerability management solution to fix that. It was like, "Okay, we can identify issues, and get that information back from the endpoint, but what are we doing about it?""
"Its pricing should be improved. It is too costly."
"In order to derive maximum benefit from BigFix, it is essential that we configure all of its features and implement them effectively. If the automation could be improved we would be able to mitigate the risks associated with zero-day threats."
"In-place and OS upgrades can be improved."
"I would like to see more integration with external data."
"I would like better support on the backend."
"I would like to see for it to be a little easier for new users to be able to learn and create relevant statements. In my opinion, that's the hardest part for bringing on new people that haven't had BigFix experience. Being able to have easier ways to build relevance in ActionScript would be the biggest improvement I'd like to see."
"It is difficult to update and maintain."
"It wasn't easy in the beginning, and some effort was required to work it out. I already had the product documentation, but it was not well organized. It wasn't easy to follow. There were a lot of documents here and there."
"There could be a feature to simplify the process without the requirement of any patch manager subscription."
"There needs to be some margin for improvement in terms of the way Satellite manages subscriptions. It is still very confusing when we have different contracts or different bundles of subscriptions, and we need to manage those within Satellite in a way that's very user-friendly."
"Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update."
"Satellite should be bundled with Ansible Tower and the Ansible Automation platform. We face challenges from a security perspective because we have micro-segmentation in our network. For each server we provision, we have to set permissions to different ports so that the servers can communicate with Satellite. If I have a single server with Satellite and the Ansible Automation Platform, it would be easier to manage security issues instead of having two or three products on various servers."
"The dashboard of Satellite is not encouraging. It does not adequately showcase all the functionality it offers."
"I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user."
BigFix is ranked 5th in Configuration Management with 91 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Tanium and AWS Systems Manager, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager, AWS Systems Manager and vCenter Configuration Manager. See our BigFix vs. Red Hat Satellite report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management 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.