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."You can remote control or RDP. That has been the most valuable because we can go into one console and can get to anything we want. Instead of going to all these different consoles, we centralized everything."
"I like a lot of the reporting capabilities and baseline configurations."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to deploy patches to nearly all applications."
"SCCM is a stable solution."
"It is a very good solution. It has a good interface and is easy to use. On top of that, it is very reliable in terms of distribution as well as getting the report."
"The most valuable features are application deployment and task-sequenced imaging."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"It provides central management interface for deployment."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is the efficiency once configured."
"Once we configure it and it keeps updating the patches, all I need to do is filter out which patches are required or not."
"The noteworthy aspect is the system's capability to handle an extensive range of services and workloads, with the potential for almost unlimited scalability."
"Downloads critical reports separately."
"The central points of managing product updates have been the tool's most valuable features."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is highly stable. It is one of the most stable solutions from Microsoft."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The cost of the product can be improved."
"The ability to integrate MDM would be great."
"We'd like the solution to make it easier to manage remote users."
"It is a bit of an old and outdated product."
"The product needs to improve scalability."
"It should provide the ability to remotely connect to mobile devices. There are some solutions that are doing that, but with Microsoft Intune, the only way to remotely connect to devices outside the organization and mobile devices is by using TeamViewer. It is pretty strange for a big company like Microsoft to not have something for that."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"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."
"They should offer patch management across platforms."
"The main problem with WSUS is that the management console doesn't allow you to do a lot of operations. It's actually quite a primitive console, and has been since day one. In order to be more effective, you need to use another tool from Microsoft that can take advantage of WSUS and also offer you the extra features you need."
"One area for potential improvement involves the administrative portal, where numerous options, including asset management and patch management, are integrated."
"The solution must provide the issue description of the patches."
"The old backup files created by this solution use up a lot of storage, and this needs to be improved."
"We have some problems when we update the servers."
"A few bugs need to be figured out for the security side."
"The only complex part was the solution’s tricky setup phase."
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, BigFix, Microsoft Intune 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.