We performed a comparison between Citrix Endpoint Management and IBM MaaS360 based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The biggest thing for us is enforcing logins only from devices that are managed by Intune."
"The solution is scalable. We currently have tens of thousands of users within our organization using the solution."
"The solution is easy to use and it has good performance."
"It is helpful for managing devices anytime and any place without requiring dependency on the local networks."
"The most valuable includes managing everything from a single console."
"Intune enables us to manage our devices from anywhere."
"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."
"It's really easy to access."
"One key feature is secure application delivery, which enables the secure delivery of mobile and web applications to end-user devices. This ensures data protection and compliance with corporate policies."
"The MAM applications of the product are great."
"We have seen improvements in compliance management on the devices."
"ShareFile, in particular, is valuable with its ease of sharing, and the best category security that is in the hands of users."
"The product is capable of acting in many different ways to help secure architecture."
"A valuable feature of Citrix Endpoint Management is that it's stable. The stability is not a challenge among the move to the cloud."
"The most valuable features of IBM MaaS360 are encryption and mobile design."
"The most valuable feature is that it's comprehensive - it covers mobile devices and laptops in one package."
"The most valuable features are mobile device management and security (which allows you to quarantine infected devices)."
"Asset management is the most valuable feature and integral for device inventory."
"Remote enablement feature and access to internal resources on the VPN."
"Using this solution has made things more convenient. Earlier, we had to depend a lot more on IT to find and resolve our issues."
"Mobile Device Configuration with policy applying: This significantly reduces time of device configuration."
"It is a stable solution."
"It would really be helpful to have the option to manage server operating systems as well, like Windows Server, at least. That way, we could scrap the use of SCCM, which requires a lot of on-premises infrastructure."
"There are some issues using the solution with macOS and iOS, and it offers limited granular control with them. Intune works better on Windows and Android."
"Integration with Mac devices requires some improvement."
"No option to do end-to-en macOS management. Slow implementation of policies."
"The reporting is subpar. That's the only issue we have with Intune. We use another solution for that purpose."
"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."
"Reporting could be improved. It needs to be more expensive and robust."
"Microsoft Intune is not user-friendly to manage and has room for improvement."
"Requires integrating with ABM before enabling some of the features."
"The tool’s battery usage was high."
"Citrix often depends on other services like backend data centers, network security, and application firewalls. Issues in these areas can be misinterpreted as Citrix issues by users."
"Citrix needs to improve the architecture. They also need to strengthen the application integration. They keep referring to some things to be required as security, and they keep selling the next level and on-premise separately. They should give the customer the opportunity to decide whether they want to use the next level on-premise or on-cloud, but they should not charge additional fees if the customer wants to deploy the next level on-premise because the customer is already being charged as the end user. They should allow next level on-premise optimization without any additional charges."
"Support for inventory management of Apple devices should be added."
"User interface is basic and not very intuitive."
"The reporting and alerting could be improved."
"The price could be lower."
"When we have MaaS360 installed on smartphones, it consumes the battery of the device at a much faster pace. This is one of the areas of improvement that I would like to highlight. We have also observed that in the contact list, a lot of duplication is happening. A single contact is duplicated three or four times, which also consumes more memory resources. If they can work on improving it for these aspects, it will have a more positive impact not only on the way the application is being consumed by the user but also on user satisfaction. A lot of new features are being deployed or rolled out by companies that are competitors of IBM MaaS360. IBM will have to ensure that all those features are on board so that we have a complete suite of features in the platform, rather than deploying multiple diverse solutions to cater to the requirements of our customers."
"It would be ideal to add support for the distribution of windows.exe applications."
"The product needs to improve tech support."
"IBM MaaS360 needs to have stronger points when it comes to the area of BYOD."
"An area for improvement would be handshaking with Microsoft in terms of trying to get a DLP on Microsoft OS."
Citrix Endpoint Management is ranked 8th in Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) with 10 reviews while IBM MaaS360 is ranked 8th in Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) with 34 reviews. Citrix Endpoint Management is rated 8.2, while IBM MaaS360 is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Citrix Endpoint Management writes "Offers flexible application management that allows secure delivery of applications to endpoints, enabling users to operate applications on the go". On the other hand, the top reviewer of IBM MaaS360 writes "It lets you separate work and personal data on mobile phones, but the interface is outdated and clunky". Citrix Endpoint Management is most compared with VMware Workspace ONE, MOBI, ManageEngine Endpoint Central and Ivanti Endpoint Manager, whereas IBM MaaS360 is most compared with SOTI MobiControl, VMware Workspace ONE, Jamf Pro, IBM MobileFirst and Cisco Meraki Systems Manager (MDM+EMM). See our Citrix Endpoint Management vs. IBM MaaS360 report.
We monitor all Unified Endpoint Management (UEM) 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.