We performed a comparison between ManageEngine Endpoint Central and Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is the UEM capabilities."
"It provides control over all mobile devices that are being connected to the corporate network."
"The ability to (somewhat) manage full Windows 10 computers including EXE-based or MSI-based application deployments using Azure Active Directory as Identity."
"This product offers an alternative solution to other UEM (Unified Endpoint Management) solutions."
"We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product."
"There is a single pane of glass for user access and a single sign-on facility for the user. If you have already logged in to Microsoft Azure or on-premises, you can redirect directly to Microsoft Endpoint Manager, monitor all your security threats, and analyze the data associated with the application in a single, unified way."
"It is a stable solution."
"This product works very well for companies already using the full Microsoft suite."
"The solution is time-saving and resource-saving."
"Has good functionality and is user-friendly."
"The patch manager is good, and it's easy to use."
"One of the benefits of Desktop Central is it made the provisioning process simpler because now we have a provisioning package. We have around 1,500 laptops at the moment and all these PCs were provisioned by a provisioning package. In the provisioning package, we have integrated every aspect of renaming, deploying applications, patching, etc., so we simply execute the provisioning package and as soon as it's executed, it will install the management agent. Once the agent is installed, it will take care of all the tasks, so we don't have to sit in front of the computer to prepare the machine. This really helps us to provision the PC quickly with our agent."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The setup is pretty simple."
"In terms of technical capability, it is doing very well. It is doing better than other industry products. It is at a place where we can compare it with Microsoft products. Its scalability is also good."
"Honestly, I have to say all features together have become the Swiss army knife of desktop management. They all work hand in hand. Software deployment saves an unbelievable amount of time installing an application on hundreds of computers."
"Integration between our departments has been the most valuable."
"The product is centralized and we can use it for security purposes."
"You can scale the solution up or down by department."
"The solution is scalable."
"A good feature that is present is MAM or Mobile Application Management. We can deploy this feature on the device, which is not managed by the organization. If I apply some security configuration on a personal device, the user would be really disappointed. What we do instead is that we give all access to the applications related to corporate and ask the users to use the application. We secure the application by putting the security features on the applications and not on the users' devices. This way, the users are happy, and we also meet our company's compliance standards. Then, everyone is happy."
"The solution offers excellent documentation that is easily available online."
"The solution is very good at securing files. For example, if I forward a secure document, it's blocked from others, as I can send it with restrictions in relation to who can open it."
"Microsoft Mobility and EMS include Intune for Mobility, which provides mobile device management and mobile application management. With mobile device management, you can control the entire device in an organization."
"There is room for improvement in integrating additional features such as Purview and SharePoint activities into Intune."
"The mobile and tablet-based versions need improvement because they are not completely user-friendly, compared to the web version. Also, data synchronization with our existing asset manager, the synchronization between multiple assets and multiple devices, takes a lot of time due to the security scanning. It should be reduced."
"Microsoft Intune is not user-friendly to manage and has room for improvement."
"Some enrollment features could be improved."
"There is room for improvement, particularly in terms of compatibility, extending beyond the well-known major brands."
"The biggest problem we ever have is when something goes out of date after 30 days when nobody has logged into it. We do have a problem trying to get those back online. We've been working with Microsoft to resolve that problem, but that's been the only issue that we've had in the last few years."
"The add-ons must be integrated into the solution."
"The reporting is subpar. That's the only issue we have with Intune. We use another solution for that purpose."
"The tool's security can be better."
"Desktop Central has very good information, however, you can't customize the dashboards."
"There is a slight delay in customer support, which is something that can be improved."
"The solution isn't fully stable, and, when it goes down, it's hard to get it up and running."
"We would like to see options for deploying Microsoft 365 accounts into Outlook. For now we only can use it to deploy exchange accounts. Also we would like to see an option do decline Windows 7 ESU patches in a bulk."
"The OS deployment could be better."
"Its licensing should be improved."
"Improvement of the chats on the web communication through the WAN would be helpful."
"We did the deployment with the help of Microsoft's consultants. But sometimes, we found it difficult to educate the application developers to integrate."
"There are certain shortcomings in the licensing model of the product where improvements are required."
"The auditing and reporting could be updated and upgraded. I would like to see light applications because they consume a lot of the device's memory at present."
"The licensing is quite expensive."
"Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is expensive."
"Microsoft's feature management is based on licenses. Microsoft follows ethical licensing and hence do not restrict the use of it."
"Its performance needs enhancement."
"Technical support could be improved. Sometimes they use a third party that's not so knowledgeable in the product and that can slow down things a bit."
More ManageEngine Endpoint Central Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine Endpoint Central is ranked 4th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 60 reviews while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is ranked 10th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 10 reviews. ManageEngine Endpoint Central is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ManageEngine Endpoint Central writes "An in-depth and intuitive product with good cross-platform capabilities, but they should have a more global support channel". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security writes "Seamless integration and easy implementation ". ManageEngine Endpoint Central is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, VMware Workspace ONE, Jamf Pro, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus and SOTI MobiControl, whereas Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM). See our ManageEngine Endpoint Central vs. Microsoft Enterprise Mobility + Security report.
See our list of best Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) 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.