We performed a comparison between Microsoft Intune and Automox based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison results: Based on the parameters we compared, Automox comes out ahead of Microsoft Intune. While both possess useful features like compliance and patch management, Microsoft Intune’s lacking macOS support, as well as other third-party management, leaves room for improvement.
"The biggest improvement to our organization involves the reduction in its man hours... We've probably saved hundreds of hours."
"It's super easy to use and we haven't found anything easier."
"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational. When I took over patching at my company, they were using on-premise architecture to patch. As the workforce shifted from being in the office into their home offices, I was able to lift and shift with no effort other than deploying the new agent out into the environment."
"They've been adding some new features lately, which I'm not nearly as familiar with, but the ability to just deploy patches and exempt certain machines from certain patches is helpful. For instance, for our servers, we may not want to roll out zero-day patches. We are able to exempt those and make sure that they don't get those policies. We've got certain servers that have to run a particular version of Java, and being able to exempt those servers from receiving Java updates is pretty fantastic."
"The flexibility in creating tools to make changes on remote machines is most valuable to me. The reporting feature is also fantastic because on any given day I can bring up a list of machines that don't have patches, for example. Or I can bring up a list of machines that are in my environment on a certain day. The solution helps me with not only my own role, and what I look for internally myself, but it also helps during audits. I can go in and look at the number of machines in there, and their owners and timelines. It certainly helps tell a story for anything that IT requires."
"It's easy to deploy agents to endpoints."
"Its flexibility is most valuable."
"Among the most valuable features are its ease of use and the Worklets. Both of them are time-savers. Worklets enable us to customize things for a given environment. It's something like when Apple lets other people create applications. Other peoples' Worklets can be used in our environment and in our customers' environments. That saves a lot of time, and it's really cool."
"It's very informative when there is an error. It allows us to backtrace where the error is and resolve that ourselves. It's a bit of a Swiss Army penknife. We find that it fixes most issues."
"We are a remote company, and the product helps us manage the global endpoints. It helps us natively manage the endpoints in the cloud from anywhere."
"It's really easy to access."
"It has improve our organization through the remote management of non-domain joined devices."
"Its protection policies are most valuable. It protects mobile devices as well as individual apps. It is pretty scalable, and its documentation is also pretty good. It is also pretty straightforward to deploy."
"It is a very helpful solution."
"Application deployment and keeping the devices secure no matter where they are, by having this cloud solution — that has been great."
"The conditional access policies that we set up are very useful."
"Asset management would be a great feature to add to Automox. We would run easier scripts or more out of the box scripts that would help us in audits. \"
"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."
"We would like to see additional detailed reporting for Service providers like us. We had to build our own reports via their APIs to meet our needs."
"There should be better inventory capabilities. Right now, they only allow you to have insight into software out-of-the-box. It would be nice to also extend that into custom inventory that can be modified and managed by the practitioner."
"As concerns the patching concepts, there's a bit of a learning curve in terms of working out how Automox wants you to work within the console, not only splitting up everything into groups, but then having the various policies assigned."
"It should have integrated workstation access. So, there should be a remote desktop feature."
"They need to improve the automation features."
"When we bring on a new client, we need to go into that client and manually set up my account, my chief engineer's account, three technicians' accounts, and a billing person's account all over again, which is annoying. We have probably up to 15 or 16 of our clients on Automox now. For every single one of those, we have had to go in and set this up. Then, if anything changes, we have to remember to go to Automox and change it 15 or 16 times. So, we just want inheritable permissions, and that is it. We have talked to them about this, and they are like, "Yeah, we hear a lot of complaints about it." I am thinking, "Guys, I have been complaining about this for a year and a half. When are you going to do it?" It must be some tricky thing or not an easy fix, because I can only assume if it were easy, then they would have done it by now."
"There should be more focus on mobile device security and integration."
"There are a lot of small use cases where we realized that some technical solution was missing in Microsoft in comparison to other products. For example, it lacks something similar to sensing or location-based rules and configurations."
"It needs incorporation of Knox, ZeroTouch, etc."
"We would like to see support for Chrome and/or devices for Chromebooks."
"From a new user's perspective, it may be a little overwhelming because there are quite a few things to look at in the console, however, once you are sort of acclimated and are familiar with your core functions, it's fairly simple and straightforward."
"Its configuration is fairly complicated. You have to do quite a bit of discovery to be able to deploy it for a customer. You have to ask them a lot of questions. So, its initial deployment is the biggest challenge. They should make it easier to deploy with the use of Wizards or something else. During the deployment stage, there could be profiles for the customers who are particularly wanting to use certain feature sets of Intune."
"The UI also needs improvements because it is complex for end-users. We have had feedback from a few users in our organization who found the UI is not feasible for tracking and analyzing all the processes and monitoring all the devices."
"Reporting needs improvement."
Automox is ranked 16th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 10 reviews while Microsoft Intune is ranked 1st in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 166 reviews. Automox is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Intune is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Automox writes "Monitors our devices irrespective of the location and the environment, allows us to exempt certain machines from certain patches, and has perfect patch management abilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Intune writes "We can manage all aspects of our devices from a single console, easy to scale, and quick to deploy". Automox is most compared with BigFix, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Tanium, NinjaOne and Qualys VMDR, whereas Microsoft Intune is most compared with Jamf Pro, VMware Workspace ONE, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Entra ID and SOTI MobiControl.
See our list of best Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) vendors.
We monitor all Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) 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.