We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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."Technical support is very helpful and very responsive."
"We are happy with the collaboration of SCCM with Patch My PC, which allows us to do patch work."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"SCCM is a stable solution."
"The scalability to deploy the package."
"The tool's most valuable features are easy patch management and software deployment."
"It's helped us solve problems surrounding patching, installing, and reporting different patches, etc., on the virtual machines."
"Microsoft Configuration Manager is integrated with other Microsoft products."
"The central points of managing product updates have been the tool's most valuable features."
"The solution gives authentic updates."
"The product provides a valuable Single Sign-On (SSO) integration feature within our IES environment, particularly with the IT directory and server systems."
"It's a scalable product."
"The most valuable features are that it is included with Windows, and it can be driven by Group Policy Objects (GPOs)."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is highly stable. It is one of the most stable solutions from Microsoft."
"The product is quite stable."
"Setup is very simple and straightforward."
"On some hardware, we'd like an easier way to get peripherals attached."
"Marketing: Our management doesn't understand that there is a piece of software which helps them automate and manage the entire network, as far as operating systems on computers."
"The database should be made to be more stable and robust, but not so much the configuration."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"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."
"Our company would prefer not rebooting computers while people are using them. There seems to be no strategy behind it."
"Regarding this, I'd like to mention the agent situation. When the agent on an end-user device is not functioning correctly, it can be quite problematic. It would be highly beneficial if there were a self-healing mechanism in place. Essentially, if the agent becomes corrupted or encounters issues, it should be able to rectify itself autonomously. This is particularly critical because, in order to utilize a tool like MECM (assuming you're referring to Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager), we need to deploy agents, known as AsMs, on all the devices we use, such as Windows 10 or Windows Server. Sometimes, when we deploy configurations or updates, they don't apply properly due to agent issues. This issue has been present since we began using MECM around 23 years ago. Unfortunately, there is currently no built-in mechanism for the agent to detect its own problems and initiate self-repair. Microsoft doesn’t have any feature to scan vulnerabilities and hence, they could include those."
"As far as load balancing across, they don't have that support yet, so that you can actually build multiple primaries and have it load balance across. They don't have any of that functionality yet. That would be a nice feature, to scale that way."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services could improve by being less cumbersome to use. It's somewhat difficult to use, but we manage to get through it."
"The product must improve its support."
"The ability to have more fine control within this solution is very important. It is not available for the solution in its current state."
"Some issues with scalability in larger organizations."
"I would like to see support for other operating systems such as Linux."
"The platform’s dashboard and reporting features need enhancement."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services could improve the ease of use."
"The approval process must be improved."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Quest KACE Systems Management, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune and GFI LanGuard. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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.