We performed a comparison between Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager and Quest KACE Systems Management based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Because users of Microsoft Endpoint do not mention a clear and proven ROI, Quest KACE Systems Management comes out on top in this comparison.
"The most valuable feature for us is the security, including risk analysis and patch management."
"It helps implement conditional access policies to restrict mobile users from accessing potentially dangerous emails."
"The ability to wipe data from and reset devices is one of the most important and valuable features. If a device is reported stolen, we can freeze it or wipe the data from it, preventing data leakage."
"The device profiling which uses the official Outlook email enabled us to control the screenshot feature and prevent copying outside of the organization's application."
"The solution is stable."
"Intune's security features for Apple iOS and Mac OS are helpful. We can check enrollment, manage public and private settings, and manage the organization's data using security key features."
"There are so many features, but Windows Autopilot is one of the features that are very valuable for most customers."
"One of the biggest advantages of Microsoft Intune is that it brings the management of Windows, macOS, iOS, Android, and even Linux under a single pane of glass."
"There is a faster time to rollout. If we get a new PC, it can be ready for productivity right away."
"SCCM is a stable solution."
"This has made the management of our environment easier."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"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."
"It does the job and meets our needs. With everybody working remotely these days, we are using this solution to deploy everything. The deployment of PCs is easy."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to deploy patches to nearly all applications."
"I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time."
"I like how when you click on the device, it shows you everything that has changed as well as the software versioning. I am really enjoying the inventory aspect of it."
"This solution makes it easy to control assets and upgrade all types of software."
"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."
"With KACE, we were able to have a simplification of the software deployment management with more granularity and flexibility."
"The ability to build scripts right on the deployment center itself, as well as building groups that take those scripts/task chains has been absolutely invaluable and one of the most important parts of my whole environment."
"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 information available via KACE is up to date, critical to our normal operations, and has become the go-to tool of our IT teams for extended support."
"Lacking ability to leverage more iOS device management internally."
"No option to do end-to-en macOS management. Slow implementation of policies."
"The solution could improve by having better integration with Apple."
"The difficulty of the the roll out is surprisingly difficult considering this product is supposed to be an integrated part of the 365 suite."
"Intune's areas for improvement revolve around security and certificate management."
"Due to the abundance of features, there's a lot to organize, which makes managing and setting up the solution challenging. The setup is immense, and it would be good to see improvement in this area."
"Microsoft Intune could improve by being more user-friendly and having it geared toward device management. The graphic interface is not very good."
"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."
"SCCM can improve on third-party application support."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"The App to upgrades to the server needs to be improved."
"The configuration of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could be improved, it is a bit complicated."
"It should provide the ability to remotely connect to mobile devices. There are some solutions that are doing that, but with Microsoft Intune, the only way to remotely connect to devices outside the organization and mobile devices is by using TeamViewer. It is pretty strange for a big company like Microsoft to not have something for that."
"There is no asset management package included."
"It would be better if reporting were more user-friendly. I would like to see an upgrade in the reporting structure in the next release. At the moment, you have to use an SQL query or configure it to pull reports through the graphical user interface. Their updates could be more regular. I think Mircosoft updates it every six months. They are also moving many things to Intune, and Microsoft decided to move the deployment solution there. I think SCCM is getting old, and Intune is new."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"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."
"I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."
"The customization of the interface needs improvement for things like end user tickets. While the functionality is good, some of that UI stuff does need improvement."
"What could be improved is the possibility to use replicas in a secure way outside our network in order to maintain the machines that never connect to our corporate network."
"Scalability is my primary concern right now."
"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 may be a good reason why some things are not easily able to be done, yet it needs work to compete with some of the other ticketing systems out there now."
"I've had some issues with patch catalogue."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 10th in Configuration Management with 38 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Affordable, easy to use, and easy to understand". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and ServiceNow Discovery, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Automox and ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Quest KACE Systems Management report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors and best Patch 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.
