We performed a comparison between Infraon IMS and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Server Monitoring solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We use the solution to automatically trigger processes to help us resolve issues. The whole IT process has been automated, such as trying to map all the users and the escalation process. So, if any issue happens, we get an SMS and WhatsApp of the report. If there is a critical issue this has to be sorted out, like the entire data center being down, then there is an alarm."
"The backup, restore, and comparison features are all good."
"The role-based dashboards provide data points and charts and topology diagrams in a single window. It's like a spider web, where the application, connectivity, and everything is defined for each user of those applications."
"Their discovery is very quick and they have a CSV file upload mechanism that allows you to onboard five thousand devices a day."
"Our response time is within 30 minutes for any support. This solution provides alerts immediately, so we are within our SLA, giving efficiency to our support."
"The most valuable feature is alerting. We get email alerts when a link is down that tell us which device is having a problem."
"It is a stable product. After the initial configuration, you don't have to tweak it much. All systems of Everest IMS work perfectly."
"The feature that I like the most and the best part is the customization."
"The most valuable feature of SCCM is the application distribution."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the software deployment. Additionally, Microsoft integrates most of the other solutions well with one another."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"Offers good patching."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"The product is useful for patch management."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in."
"The GUI is in need of improvement. It is not drag-and-drop or easy to use."
"I would like to see an integrated view of Infraon IMS and Infraon Desk. It would be very helpful if that were integrated into the solution."
"Email support is a bit slow. Once you drop an email, it takes time."
"The graphical view of the topology does not show us all of the connectivity in our network, which is something that could be improved."
"There might be some features in other products that are currently not there in Everest IMS and can be included. I have not yet compared it with any other product."
"We have enquired if there are any possibilities of monitoring non-IPBS devices."
"This solution is available in SaaS. The reason why we have not gone to SaaS is they do not have a country-specific separation of assets. There are GDPR and other requirements that might require country-specific sensitive information to be filtered as well as other things that need to be taken care of. Normally, if we need to do any compliance, like ISO27000 compliance, they don't have such a report within their system. This kind of report is missing from their SaaS. That is one of the reasons that we have gone to the on-prem version, where I am assured that my data is secure."
"I would like to have the option to add a new device or meet with the next release. Right now, it needs to be done from the backend which results in a heavy reliance on R&D."
"The product needs to improve scalability."
"The main thing is that SCCM has to become an appliance instead of a server. When I say appliance, it has to come preconfigured so that it is drop-shipped into the enterprise and then you activate the feature sets that you want. It should pull down all the latest binaries. Once that is all there, it should have a discovery tool which goes out and discovers the assets within an enterprise. If the server, workstation, and applications are all coming from the same vendor, why not have the vendor do this work for us and automate it as much as it possibly can?"
"One area of improvement is regarding the patching of Office 365 products. We have some difficulties on this side, and it can be improved."
"Its client interface should be more accessible, and the notifications should be more customizable from the console. It should be more user friendly and have some kind of customized notifications so that we can use it on the client side. These are the reasons why we restricted its use only for the server environment and didn't use it on the client side."
"The ability to integrate MDM would be great."
"The solution is a bit heavy on the sources such as RAM or CPU and the software needs to be a bit lighter."
"I would like to see an agentless version of the solution."
"The time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Infraon IMS is ranked 26th in Server Monitoring while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews. Infraon IMS is rated 8.4, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Infraon IMS writes "Provides data accuracy for availability and policy harmonization". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Affordable, easy to use, and easy to understand". Infraon IMS is most compared with Zabbix, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Microsoft Intune. See our Infraon IMS vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager report.
See our list of best Server Monitoring vendors.
We monitor all Server Monitoring 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.