We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Microsoft Configuration Manager 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 most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"This product is a great solution at a great price as long as it is only going to be used for a local area network."
"The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"The initial setup was easy."
"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is very scalable."
"We have found the scalability to be quite good."
"Offers good patching."
"I like Mircosoft's technical support. Microsoft has a few updates, like some of the critical KBs. They are published within the interval time, and in case of an escalation on the client missions, we will raise a ticket with the Microsoft team. They will create a hotfix or a critical update. They will chat with us, and that is one thing I like about Microsoft. Whenever any issues occur at my organization, they will help you out soon as possible within the SLA."
"I have found the solution to be scalable. We have around 50,000 users using the solution."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"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 is a very well-rounded product. It is a complete package with all the features using which we are able to manage our PCs very efficiently."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding more modules, such as asset control or asset inventory."
"The documentation on how to use this solution in a Linux environment is not clear, which is something that should be improved because it is complicated."
"GFI LanGuard has some technical limitations with machines."
"GFI LanGuard could improve the rollback feature. If we have installed the wrong we have had some issues with the rollback function. Additionally, more input from GFI LanGuard for the custom software push install."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"The tool's deployment is complex and depends on the architecture you want to implement."
"It is a bit of an old and outdated product."
"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."
"The database should be made to be more stable and robust, but not so much the configuration."
"The setup was complex and I faced a lot of problems initially because I was new to the solution."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
"The main thing is that SCCM has to become an appliance instead of a server. When I say appliance, it has to come preconfigured so that it is drop-shipped into the enterprise and then you activate the feature sets that you want. It should pull down all the latest binaries. Once that is all there, it should have a discovery tool which goes out and discovers the assets within an enterprise. If the server, workstation, and applications are all coming from the same vendor, why not have the vendor do this work for us and automate it as much as it possibly can?"
"The product needs to improve scalability."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GFI LanGuard writes "A scalable, competitively priced solution with a good ROI and easy setup process ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager, BigFix and Kaseya VSA, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager 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.