We performed a comparison between Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac 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 tool is a stable product."
"The website development section is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"The solution is easy to implement."
"Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, and Mac helps to ensure that everything is up to date."
"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."
"The Systems Deployment Appliance is magical when it comes to automating deployment... Not only can we have multiple images, specific to end-users' uses, but we have a plethora of post-installation tasks to install or configure the system, tasks that can be re-used for each system. You just have one basic base image, and then you use the post-install tasks to customize everything else. It is amazing."
"My company had bought some new machines. We used the tool to do some basic settings to ship every machine the same way and undertake the Windows deployment. We did the scripted installation. The tool helped us deploy custom software for specific departments. We also did Windows updates with the product."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to have an overview of all devices that are accessing our environment."
"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."
"There is one place for a lot of different things. If somebody has a problem with their computer, they will put in a ticket. From there, we will know who it is and the assets assigned to them, because there is one place to go look for what we are talking about and with whom we are talking. Just having one place for everything is really convenient. For example, we are able to deploy software to hundreds of computers. We don't need to go to each individual device."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to monitor updates—the software versions—on machines so that we can keep everything compliant."
"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."
"The solution can be quite expensive, compared to other options on the market."
"The tool needs to improve its visual system."
"The better way to improve the solution is by working on an area where it lacks, which includes the migration part."
"I've had some issues with patch catalogue."
"What could be improved is the possibility to use replicas in a secure way outside our network in order to maintain the machines that never connect to our corporate network."
"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."
"Paying for the product should come with full and extended training anytime it is needed."
"There may be a good reason why some things are not easily able to be done, yet it needs work to compete with some of the other ticketing systems out there now."
"I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."
"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."
"Its dashboard needs improvement. Currently, there is no way to modify the dashboard. There should be more flexibility so that we can create views according to our use case."
More Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is ranked 15th in Patch Management with 4 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is rated 9.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac writes "With good website development capabilities, the solution also provides exceptional stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is most compared with Ivanti Security Controls, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac 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.