We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and Quest KACE Systems Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Compliance solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's got a very friendly user interface."
"The stability is pretty good."
"Secure and easy connect is the most valuable feature. It is a reliable solution, and it works."
"What I find valuable in FortiClient is its patch management capabilities, allowing remote updates efficiently."
"Installation was easy."
"I find it very easy to configure and also very stable."
"What I like most about FortiClient is that it's easy to use. The way it displays information is very straightforward."
"It is a stable solution."
"The scripting part increases IT productivity because of the specialized software in our environments for students' courses. You need to use software which is not programmed by developers. A lot of software for building houses or other things is developed by normal guys, who do not have much skill in programming. When you need to install this type of software, it is very difficult. You have to install registry keys, etc. For that, it is very good to use the scripting part of this solution. So, you can automate this part as well."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to have an overview of all devices that are accessing our environment."
"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."
"You don't have to be an advanced user. Rather, in terms of ease of use, this product is right where it needs to be."
"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."
"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."
"When vulnerabilities are exploited so much, it is nice to be able to quickly detect or deploy what is needed within our off-work hours or during work hours without a reboot."
"The software asset management has been a big help, even when it comes to license true-ups. I can use it to find out how many Tivoli we have, and boom, there's the number... And you can actually click on the information about the software and it shows, for example, that these five servers are where it's being reported. If you really want, you can log in to them and validate."
"While we like patch management, it would be nice if it could handle patch management for other solutions, like Microsoft."
"I would like for the next release to be more user-friendly for users to do not have as much of a technical background."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"In the next release, I would like to see an additional layer of security added."
"Its stability can be improved. It is not as reliable as I would like it to be. There are times when things don't work quite right. Our biggest pain point is not related to Fortinet FortiClient and the whole scheme of things. It is related to one of the additional services called FortiGuard. They are the arm that does all of the updates to definitions, keeps all the signatures updated, and responds to new threats and whatnot. What we have found is that they react quickly, but sometimes their solutions aren't compatible with all of the components of the Fortinet security suite, specifically around FortiSandbox."
"Fortinet FortiClient should improve its visibility of the consumption of traffic and end-user action, which is very low."
"Fortinet FortiClient could improve the compatibility with mobile applications that are allowed and sometimes they do not respond. However, Microsoft Windows applications are very good."
"The pricing of the solution should be less expensive."
"The KACE Go Mobile App crashes a lot, and it always has. I would love to see that get fixed because it's very convenient when it does work properly, but most of the time it does not."
"My biggest complaint is that almost every time they send out a new version, it fixes something and breaks another. Something that wasn't working in the last version now works, but something else stops; or they'll remove some dashboard that I really found to be nice and replace it with something totally different that I could care less about."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
"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 problem is that it's harder to directly emulate a lot of the stuff that the group policies do, using the KACE solution. With regular group policies, you just specify the various settings you want to change on the workstations, and then you specify the workstations and—while it's kind of an ugly mess—it does it. Whereas on KACE, you really have to know what you're doing with scripting to effectively script those exact same changes."
"When we have to do a rebuild on these machines, although it is rare, I would like to be able to do more than 10 at a time. With the current limit, it slows me down because I have to set up 10, then the next 10, and so forth."
"The initial setup was complex. It is a Linux-based virtual server, where the customer cannot get into the back-end, so you can only follow their prompts. Then, there are specific things that have to be done in their implementation and upgrade phases that have to be done in a certain order or steps. If you don't get those steps right, the system doesn't work. I think that either simplifying that process or providing really good step-by-step documentation would be helpful."
"I've had some issues with patch catalogue."
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 1st in Endpoint Compliance with 86 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 5th in Endpoint Compliance with 38 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Fortinet FortiEDR, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway and Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and NinjaOne. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. Quest KACE Systems Management report.
See our list of best Endpoint Compliance vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Compliance 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.
