We performed a comparison between Automox and Kaseya VSA based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, HCLTech, Kaseya and others in Patch Management."The biggest improvement to our organization involves the reduction in its man hours... We've probably saved hundreds of hours."
"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."
"Previously, we would run a report, scan it, and compare it. We were spending 15 to 30 minutes a month on each machine on this stuff because you would find stuff that wasn't up to date, then you had to fix it. This solution takes that time down to minutes. Automox saves us easily many hours a month."
"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."
"The fact that it's just one product that can patch multiple operating systems is really great."
"It's easy to deploy agents to endpoints."
"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."
"As a small IT shop, the weird feature that the VSA has that I have not found anywhere else is they have these little colored dots that tell you the status of the machine. Is it offline and powered up? Is it actively being used? Is it idle? A lot of our clients ask us to do things for them, but, of course, they don't really want us to be underfoot. So we always look for, "Hey, there's an idle machine. We can work on that one now." And to say it makes it easy, we can do that at a glance. In any other tool we've looked at, you have to go several layers deep to see if the machine is in use, and you could spend your entire day just trying to find a machine that was idle, whereas, with Kaseya VSA, you can tell at a glance."
"The most valuable part of this solution is the security features that it offers."
"We can schedule the patching of the endpoints."
"The most valuable piece of the puzzle for me is what they call Live Connect. It is the piece that allows you to support an end-user without having to take the keyboard and mouse."
"The most valuable features of Kaseya VSA are remote control, live connect, and automation."
"The product's support team is very quick to respond, especially because the tool's technical team operates in the same time zone where I am located."
"The most valuable features of this solution are automation, inventory, and patch management."
"Kesaya is highly configurable."
"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository. Currently, all updates are provided directly from the internet. So, if you have 1,000 devices, all 1,000 devices go directly out to the internet. We would love the option of being able to put the updates on local storage so that we're not consuming as much bandwidth. That is literally the only thing that we've ever wanted."
"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."
"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."
"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."
"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."
"They need to improve the automation features."
"The biggest area they need to fix, without a doubt, is the ability to copy and sync profiles and worklets between all of the organizations you manage, and the ability to have top-level user access control across all of the companies that you manage."
"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 response to bugs is slow and software improvement comes slowly too. The lack of response to our feature requests made it feel like they were going into a black hole. Additionally, when we encountered bugs or issues with the VSA, they were slow to respond to those too."
"There should be more Mac support. Whenever a new Mac operating system comes out, the support is very limited. It takes them a while to get things up to date. We're seeing more and more people move to Mac from the Windows environment for various reasons, but their support for Mac is very limited. A lot of it might have to do with Mac itself, but there are ways to improve upon that. That would be my biggest thing for improvement."
"It's very difficult to update the third-party software on every device."
"The predefined reports are not up to the mark and you have to do a lot of customization."
"I have been looking for a way to deploy patches via the internet to selected equipment from Kaseya VSA, but it seems impossible."
"There is room for improvement in the remote control strengths."
"The user interface is somewhat outdated."
"The UI could be streamlined. The menu has 18 options, but we only use three. It has a lot of redundant stuff. Software management, software deployment, patch management, etc., all do the same thing, but they're different programs and licenses."
Automox is ranked 12th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Kaseya VSA is ranked 4th in Patch Management with 29 reviews. Automox is rated 8.8, while Kaseya VSA is rated 7.6. 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 Kaseya VSA writes "Single portal management, cost-saving, with thorough technical support". Automox is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, BigFix and Qualys VMDR, whereas Kaseya VSA is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, ConnectWise Automate, NinjaOne, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services and Datto Remote Monitoring and Management.
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.