We performed a comparison between Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac and Quest KACE Systems Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Patch Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The tool is a stable product."
"The website development section is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, and Mac helps to ensure that everything is up to date."
"The solution is easy to implement."
"Patching is definitely the most valuable feature. It gives us good, centralized software, which comes in very handy since we are doing 400 servers at a time. It enables us to manage all the servers, and to deal with the application team regarding reboots and scheduling."
"The scripting is a very valuable feature, as it saves us time on pushing certain things out to the users, such as software and patches."
"The single pane of glass for managing devices is helpful because it allows me to perform updates and control things without having to disturb the doctors or nurses."
"The big pros of Quest KACE Systems Management are its simple interface, and simple, direct management. It's very easy to maintain and manage the device, and it's easy to get it up and running. You can have it up and running in an hour..."
"The software asset management has been a big help, even when it comes to license true-ups. I can use it to find out how many Tivoli we have, and boom, there's the number... And you can actually click on the information about the software and it shows, for example, that these five servers are where it's being reported. If you really want, you can log in to them and validate."
"It is excellent in terms of updating and configuring everything the way we need. For anything more complex, we do professional service engagements, and they're exceptional. For anything less complex, we just need to ask questions. Their support division is extremely good too."
"The most valuable feature is the imaging of computers through the SDA... Being able to do that so quickly with the SDA, and to then use the SMA for reinstalling software, has been huge for our productivity."
"The ability to push an image to a machine, wake that image up, and just blast a new image to a computer without even having to touch it, and then push the software to that machine. This just made things so much more convenient for us and so much more efficient."
"The solution can be quite expensive, compared to other options on the market."
"The tool needs to improve its visual system."
"The better way to improve the solution is by working on an area where it lacks, which includes the migration part."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
"I think it should have the ability to have the applications automatically update. It would be really helpful if this would override what the user might choose to do."
"There isn't a lot they need to improve with the solution itself at this point. It is pretty close to providing a single pane of glass for everything that we need for endpoint management specifically on all devices. There is very little that it doesn't provide for us, and for those, we have to go to other methods. There are some of the patching solutions that it doesn't take care of for us. So, we have to do those manually on the devices, and that's really the biggest thing. It doesn't do patching really well for non-Microsoft applications. The major application updates, particularly Windows updates, don't function nearly as well, but, for the vast majority of things, it does just fine. If they could improve in this aspect, that'd be great, but I don't know if they're going to be able to do that."
"I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."
"The only pain point I have is with their salespeople. They call too often. They're too aggressive in trying to upsell. We know what we need, and we know if we want to expand. I don't mind quarterly calls from them, but sometimes, it is weekly. They need to get their sales team under control. The main goal of their support people and professional services is to make sure they deliver the service, and they deliver it well, whereas their salespeople are so interested in making a sale that they're wasting my time."
"I would like them to implement VBScript language in KACE Systems Management. Currently, we can only use PowerShell."
"Imaging becomes a problem when you start to try to go beyond doing more than thirty or forty machines at a time. We initially tried to do that virtually and it just, it wouldn't work."
"My biggest complaint is that almost every time they send out a new version, it fixes something and breaks another. Something that wasn't working in the last version now works, but something else stops; or they'll remove some dashboard that I really found to be nice and replace it with something totally different that I could care less about."
More Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is ranked 15th in Patch Management with 4 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is rated 9.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac writes "With good website development capabilities, the solution also provides exceptional stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is most compared with Ivanti Security Controls, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac vs. Quest KACE Systems Management report.
See our list of best Patch Management vendors.
We monitor all Patch 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.