We performed a comparison between AWS Systems Manager and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a very stable and scalable cloud-only solution."
"The ability to push applications on devices is valuable. You do not have to manually install applications one by one. If you like to use ten different applications, you do not have to manually go and download them one by one. Intune can compile a package for you, and then you can just push them from the admin center."
"A valuable feature is user enrollment, where users can enroll their devices in their organizations themselves."
"For our office workers who are not based in Norway, when we order the PC, we can do some of the settings for them. These are standardized settings. We can set them up exactly as they are in Norway so that they're the same."
"Users can make screenshots, and devices only need the minimal version of iOS."
"I like the fact that it's integrated with the rest of the Microsoft products, so customers can manage it from their Office 365 portal or Azure portal."
"The mobile application management, MAM, is the most useful aspect of the solution."
"We already use a lot of Microsoft products in our company, and therefore, it made sense to also use this product."
"With AWS Systems Manager, our company can patch our systems directly from it, so we don't need to patch our systems manually."
"Systems Manager has a feature where it analyzes the logs and gives us a performance overview in the form of a graph. We know when it's taking up more resources and when there are spikes, so we can predict the usability."
"The solution's ability to scale is good."
"When we do the automation in the cloud, we use the SSM agent. This helps us to test our automation and documents, and monitor the cloud."
"Has a variety of automation options."
"The solution is user-friendly"
"Endpoint Manager is valuable to our organization because it allows us to connect to our enterprise from remote locations securely. The most useful feature is its robustness and scalability. It is highly scalable and flexible, allowing us to use it in various environments. Additionally, we can specialize the policies related to each device group. This ensures that each group has access to the applications they need for their work and non-work hours."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is patch management."
"Technical support is very helpful and very responsive."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"I have found the solution to be scalable. We have around 50,000 users using the solution."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is valuable in keeping our systems updated. We are able to send updates to all the systems. Additionally, the Intune integration is helpful."
"It is a very well-rounded product. It is a complete package with all the features using which we are able to manage our PCs very efficiently."
"It works well for the endpoints for the customer I'm consulting. It has a bunch of knobs, and you can tune it to do lots of things."
"It's the granularity: 'Is your firewall on? Is BitLocker on?' It's not amazing granularity. But I've looked into other products, like Duo, and they're all similar."
"There needs to be more support for Mac operating systems."
"There can be some added features, such as an improved dashboard. Any new feature that could be a benefit to our customers would be good."
"They need to add more group policies. Intune currently does not have many group policies that you can deploy. Its reporting, which is very limited at the moment, also needs improvement. It will be great if they can add report customization. Its stability needs to be improved. Sometimes, when you register a device in Intune, it doesn't show up instantly on the engine portal on the admin side. They need to provide better support for complicated issues. They also have a long turnaround time."
"Cost is the biggest factor for us right now. Microsoft Intune and AD P1 together in a bundle is a good thing to have, but it is very costly compared to other products in the market. Otherwise, Microsoft Intune is the best."
"The closest Microsoft Intune can be to GPOs, the better. There needs to be more granularity on application deployments. However, they have done better recently with the application deployments."
"One big problem with Microsoft is that they're changing the names of the products quite often, or they're quite consistently doing so. Intune is now Endpoint administration. Constantly switching the user interface or the administrative interface makes it quite hard to keep pace. If you are on a two-week holiday and you come back and look at the same screen you have looked at for the last couple of months, it looks different, which is annoying. Changing things around all the time doesn't make it easy."
"Lacking ability to leverage more iOS device management internally."
"The fact that AWS Systems Manager takes time to complete the patching process, makes it an area where improvements are required."
"Additional features can be added as per customer requirements."
"The AWS UIs are not the most intuitive. Also, the usability needs room for improvement."
"Lacks sufficient integrations."
"We formerly used third-party products to analyze the log, give us information, and find bottlenecks. Systems Manager could provide more tools that conduct this analysis, so we don't have to do it ourselves."
"The current challenge is that we can't pull any incidents from other accounts."
"In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments."
"Marketing: Our management doesn't understand that there is a piece of software which helps them automate and manage the entire network, as far as operating systems on computers."
"The deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"This solution should be simpler, and more consistent across modules/sections."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"The tool's deployment is complex and depends on the architecture you want to implement."
"Could do with some cosmetic improvements on the user interface."
"The reports are too busy. They could be simpler. I'm a technician, so I don't care how pretty the reports look. They should be easy to read. I'm designing this for production folks. They need to read the reports quickly when they're patching in the middle of the night."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Systems Manager is ranked 7th in Configuration Management with 6 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews. AWS Systems Manager is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of AWS Systems Manager writes "Offers a variety of automation options; simplifies governance and administration ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". AWS Systems Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Red Hat Satellite, AWS CloudFormation, BigFix and Chef, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Red Hat Satellite. See our AWS Systems Manager vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration 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.
