We performed a comparison between Citrix Endpoint Management and IceWarp based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, VMware, ManageEngine and others in UEM (Unified Endpoint Management)."The conditional access policies that we set up are very useful."
"We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product."
"The technical support of Microsoft Intune is good."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"The Asset Management and Auto Pilot are valuable features."
"The most valuable feature for us is the security, including risk analysis and patch management."
"The solution appears to be stable and scalable."
"The standout features of Intune are its excellent mobile device management and highly effective application management capabilities."
"We have seen improvements in compliance management on the devices."
"ShareFile, in particular, is valuable with its ease of sharing, and the best category security that is in the hands of users."
"The MAM applications of the product are great."
"The product is capable of acting in many different ways to help secure architecture."
"A valuable feature of Citrix Endpoint Management is that it's stable. The stability is not a challenge among the move to the cloud."
"It has great communication capabilities for team chatting and web conferences."
"IceWarp has multiple applications that are easy to use for many people."
"The solution's voice services work well for our company."
"The product is used very extensively in my company since we have around 1,500 users using it. Also, there is no requirement for any administrators to manage the product by the people who own the solution."
"It's scalable and stable."
"The groupware module is the most valuable feature."
"The solution has a very good log-in to the UI when compared to other solutions."
"Its price is the most valuable. It is definitely one of the lowest price solutions."
"It would really be helpful to have the option to manage server operating systems as well, like Windows Server, at least. That way, we could scrap the use of SCCM, which requires a lot of on-premises infrastructure."
"Technical support is not that great."
"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."
"It would be good if, in addition to the minimal patching and compliance, we could also use Intune for application deployment. For instance, if a device is not patched, Intune should have the ability to push not only a Microsoft patch but also other patches, such as a browser patch."
"The reporting could be improved, as it's pretty poor compared to other products of this type."
"In future releases, I would like to see better integration with Apple products."
"The security features should be improved."
"The reporting is subpar. That's the only issue we have with Intune. We use another solution for that purpose."
"Requires integrating with ABM before enabling some of the features."
"The tool’s battery usage was high."
"Citrix needs to improve the architecture. They also need to strengthen the application integration. They keep referring to some things to be required as security, and they keep selling the next level and on-premise separately. They should give the customer the opportunity to decide whether they want to use the next level on-premise or on-cloud, but they should not charge additional fees if the customer wants to deploy the next level on-premise because the customer is already being charged as the end user. They should allow next level on-premise optimization without any additional charges."
"Support for inventory management of Apple devices should be added."
"With multiple databases for VOIP, chat and web IMAP, maintenance is cumbersome."
"Our customers sometimes have problems receiving mail."
"The solution should improve the mailing list feature. Google has a similar feature where you can automate sending files to different people in a sequence, but that feature is no longer available in the current version of IceWarp. Other features may also have been removed in the current version."
"The exchange compatibility mode is rather limited. Their technical support can also be better. They only provide online support, and there should be some option for escalating."
"It is difficult to disable user rights on the console so some users accidentally delete their documents or user details."
"The tool's configuration capabilities are not straightforward. Apart from that, if I want to archive emails into a vault so that they can be retrieved again later, the integration doesn't work, and IceWarp crashes."
"I would like to have a trial for mobile applications and more documentation similar to Google Drive with mobile applications."
"Support should be improved. Most of the time, the queries are not resolved within the SLA."
Citrix Endpoint Management is ranked 7th in UEM (Unified Endpoint Management) with 9 reviews while IceWarp is ranked 6th in Email Applications with 15 reviews. Citrix Endpoint Management is rated 8.2, while IceWarp is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Citrix Endpoint Management writes "Great application deployment, gateway and split tunnel features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IceWarp writes "A tool that is scalable and can accommodate a large number of users but needs to improve the support it provides to its users ". Citrix Endpoint Management is most compared with VMware Workspace ONE, MOBI, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, CyberArk Identity and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM), whereas IceWarp is most compared with Google Workspace, Zimbra Collaboration, Microsoft Exchange, Zoho Mail and KerioConnect.
We monitor all UEM (Unified Endpoint 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.