We performed a comparison between BigFix and Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Based on the above variables, we would conclude that BigFix slightly edges out Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. Our users find that Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is harder to use and its support is less effective.
"The performance of Microsoft Intune is good."
"Configuration profiles, remediation, scripts, and auto-pilot features are very good."
"While Microsoft Intune boasts a wide range of features, its user-friendliness and bundled licensing cost are key considerations for me."
"The ability to send configurations to our systems is valuable, particularly as we don't have a regular Windows AD server. Our current environment doesn't have a Windows AD, which limits our ability to push GPOs. However, this is where the solution can step in and help us push policies."
"A valuable feature is user enrollment, where users can enroll their devices in their organizations themselves."
"Stable solution at a good price."
"It allows our clients to have the confidence to centrally manage policies for security. It helps them in securing the organization from a technology aspect."
"It has improve our organization through the remote management of non-domain joined devices."
"From a security standpoint, it allows us to make sure that we're not leaving ourselves vulnerable to exploits and things like that. That's the biggest advantage that we see to the product from a security standpoint."
"The patch management and the BigFix Inventory have been the most valuable features."
"The best feature of BigFix is its multi-platform support."
"We are able to go from patching thousands of machines by twenty to thirty people to one person."
"Patch Management for a variety of operating systems makes it valuable as we can rely on a single tool for obtaining patch compliance of the entire compute infrastructure."
"It is for multiple use cases. A lot of people are looking at it just for security, and that's really endpoint security. The endpoint management part of it in terms of being able to constantly do patching for Windows, Unix, macOS, Cloud, Raspberry, VMware, and all Linux flavors is important, and they are very good at that. They have support for virtually every OS on the market."
"It has improved my organization because we can automate a lot of tasks. We went from manually patching machines or doing our best and having very little visibility into it to us being able to set it and forget it and getting really good results on first-pass patching."
"BigFix is incredibly fast and accurate in patching, reporting, and remediation."
"The solution is user-friendly and easy to learn."
"Patching is very effective and reporting is very good."
"This has made the management of our environment easier."
"The initial setup is fairly straightforward."
"The solution effectively handles inventory management, deployment, and reporting."
"We're a Microsoft-centric organization, so we are happy with the integration between products."
"It is easy to install, and quick to deploy."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"There should be more support for macOS. Even though macOS is supported by Intune and Microsoft is working very hard to get more features into Intune to manage macOS, that's one thing they can give a lot more attention to."
"The current Intune reporting functionality could benefit from some improvements."
"It needs certificate provisioning for S/MIME purposes."
"The policies we had in SCCM and AD offered features that are missing from Microsoft Intune."
"There could be more wizard-driven policy development or creation. Some of the policies can get quite complex. If they have a wizard that assists the administrators in creating the policy, that will be a great job."
"There are a few security features that are not available in Microsoft Intune, when compared to other products."
"The synchronization could be improved."
"The feature that allows us to import the business application from the configuration manager to Intune is not very good at this time."
"BigFix is actually a little bit on the expensive side in Turkey because of the dollar's exchange rate in our currency."
"In-place and OS upgrades can be improved."
"I would like to see the integration of user security between the different products to be improved. There's separate security for compliance, separate security for web reports, and the console, and you have to manage those things separately."
"The product is quite buggy and complicated to use."
"The main shortcoming of BigFix was integration with vulnerability management. If you had a vulnerability in your software and BigFix on the endpoint, you needed integration with Qualys, Tenable, or another vulnerability management solution to fix that. It was like, "Okay, we can identify issues, and get that information back from the endpoint, but what are we doing about it?""
"The stability is generally pretty good. The one thing that we came across is the battle between load on endpoints and load on our servers and relays versus how quickly, effectively and reliably actions can be taken. I'd like to not have to take an action on a system while I'm working with someone and then have to say whether something will happen between five seconds or thirty minutes from that point."
"They don't have a proper mobile device management capability. They're working on it, however, that's the one thing that needs improvement so that you can have full unified endpoint management."
"It could use better integration with Hypervisor products like VMware."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"The assets have reached their end-of-life, and patching them is a complex and laborious task. It would be highly advantageous if there were an integrated solution that provided distinct options for each end-of-life asset, streamlining the process and facilitating comprehension."
"I want the system to provide some dependency relations. I would also like to see the relationship between different machines."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could improve the integration."
"The TSM component could be improved."
"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."
"The solution can be improved with the addition of a mobile device manager."
"The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
BigFix is ranked 5th in Configuration Management with 91 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Tanium, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus and Red Hat Satellite, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Tanium, AWS Systems Manager and Red Hat Satellite. See our BigFix vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors and best Patch 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.
SCCM is very robust but you need more time and people to manage it.
For a company of 200 employees only can use something easier to manage such as PDQ deployment S/W. it's a lot cheaper and easier to manage.
Kumar.
We have 1500 users and even with a reasonable sized support team we find SCCM difficult to manage. I haven't experienced the other solutions, but I suspect you will be better placed with an alternative to SCCM.
Before answering to your needs, we need to understand that there are two distinctive features from SCCM and BigFix.
SCCM since 2020 has stopped its support for Linux Patching, so in its entirety, if you are only using Windows, you might consider SCCM. It still support Mac with basic features, but it depends on your requirements. Again, the operation with SCCM is also not easy at all.
Bigfix on the other side is a solution to manage different types of OS, as we say it distributed environment. Windows, Linux, Mac, etc. Bigfix is mainly used in large companies with more than 1000+ employees. It is not cheap as Bigfix is a robust enterprise solution.
You might want to consider other automated patch management tools such as LANDesk or Managed Engine which has been seen in deployment in smaller enterprises.
Cheers,
Rendy
Hi Ihsan,
Hope you are doing well, As per my experience to deploy SCCM for 200 users is not worth it, you want to be blessed use Quest product KACE System Management Appliance, easy to manage and upgrade (patching/managing end point managing and many more).
https://www.itcentralstation.c...
Thank you.