We performed a comparison between Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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 solution performs well."
"I like that we could evaluate every client and compare some weaknesses and vulnerability exploits in Microsoft Windows Server Update Services. This is a useful way to test applications against an attacker attempting to exploit the operating system."
"Downloads critical reports separately."
"A valuable feature about this solution is that it enforces an updating and patching process for my applications."
"The solution gives authentic updates."
"It provides central management interface for deployment."
"The solution has great potential and leaves the user with almost limitless possibilities. It is truly a product with a million uses."
"Setup is very simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to monitor updates—the software versions—on machines so that we can keep everything compliant."
"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."
"It also does patch management. At the moment, I'm rolling out a new feature update, 20.8.2, and it's a great challenge because we have to deploy it to 1,200 computers in the home office. We want to do it without interrupting production, but KACE is reliable and it's easy to adapt it to my needs for how and when to deploy the feature update."
"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."
"KACE has made our life much easier since we got off the Microsoft solution. The Microsoft solution was a lot harder to image over different ports and stuff. They would only have this one place where we could do all the imaging. Now, we have a whole building where we can image from. This means that we can image from our storage area, where we have a place to do our imaging. We can also image right at our desks, which is a lot easier."
"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."
"Using this solution saves us lots of time, especially when it comes to performing updates."
"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."
"The only complex part was the solution’s tricky setup phase."
"The solution's stability could be improved because sometimes, there are some problems in communication and sending updates and patches."
"There are some bugs in IIS."
"This solution's deployment could be improved. When I was the admin, there were some problems when deploying to clients. Sometimes the policy is not effective. I guess, more on the reliability side, more reliable means working more often with the clients. It could be easier to deploy."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services could improve the ease of use."
"In the next release, I would like to see additional tools added to fix the engine issues on the client's side."
"The approval process must be improved."
"The platform’s dashboard and reporting features need enhancement."
"I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."
"It is a little bit difficult to use the license compliances because you need to decide when you are using the software catalog if you are using it with their license compliance or the normal software part. Under the inventory, you can use software as a menu link or software catalog. Most of my specialist software is not in the software catalog. When I try to import them, in my license compliances overview, there are cryptic names for this software that I have to import. That is not very good for the reports that I use. When I take them to my bosses, they see cryptic names of software that they don't understand. It would be much better for me if I could use software and the software catalog as well for the license compliances."
"The software asset management functionality is an area that needs to be improved. It could be more automated because when connections need to be made, such as when I connected Adobe and my malware removed, the process was pretty much manual."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
"I would like for there to be improvement when it comes to Microsoft and Windows updates. It has the ability to do it but the control of it is not there like I have in the Windows Server Update Services. The way KACE does it is still very granular. You don't really see the process like it is in the Windows Server Update Services. I think that would be one of the biggest things that I would like to see KACE really put some work into and really make that a big enhancement."
"They could make the booting solution easier for different things, e.g., easier to insert drivers. They could make it easier to create a new image and put it onto the server. Those would be some nice solutions. They could make it so that somebody who has no knowledge at all can do it. That would be really nice. Because every time, until I get it memorized, I still need to go back to the training, the manual, or Google it to figure it out again. If they would make it a lot easier, to where a nine-year-old could do it, that would be really cool. If they made it easier, I could have more people managing the images on the server, instead of just one or two people."
"Easier integration would be beneficial."
"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."
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 38 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune and GFI LanGuard, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, BigFix, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Automox. See our Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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.
