We performed a comparison between Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager and Microsoft Windows Server Update Services based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Patch Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It's been doing a lot for us, especially with third-party software patching and scheduling. We create multiple projects for monthly patch distribution and manage it all well."
"When it comes to Ivanti Patch for endpoints, I find peer-to-peer patching valuable. Having a peer-to-peer patching capability is highly beneficial for us."
"Clear visibility regarding the status of the endpoint."
"Instead of leaving each server to download their own updates, with WSUS you have a centralized management tool for all the updates alongside a log for all the servers. By creating and deploying a WSUS server that will download the updates from the internet and dispatch them to the other servers, you can have control over the entire deployment process."
"The interface is easy to use."
"The most valuable features are that it is included with Windows, and it can be driven by Group Policy Objects (GPOs)."
"It is a scalable solution."
"Compared to Linux, Windows Server’s setup is easier."
"Setup is very simple and straightforward."
"I like that we could evaluate every client and compare some weaknesses and vulnerability exploits in Microsoft Windows Server Update Services. This is a useful way to test applications against an attacker attempting to exploit the operating system."
"The most important aspect is that we can centrally deploy the updates that are necessary for the organization. It's important."
"Inability to configure a rule-based management."
"The major challenges are macOS updates, patching, and backups. And for drawbacks, I wish Patch management was cloud-based instead of hosted on our own server."
"It would be great to have an easier way to patch Linux machines within the product."
"The platform’s dashboard and reporting features need enhancement."
"The solution must provide the issue description of the patches."
"One area for potential improvement involves the administrative portal, where numerous options, including asset management and patch management, are integrated."
"The ability to have more fine control within this solution is very important. It is not available for the solution in its current state."
"The only complex part was the solution’s tricky setup phase."
"The old backup files created by this solution use up a lot of storage, and this needs to be improved."
"There are some bugs in IIS."
"The approval process must be improved."
More Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager is ranked 17th in Patch Management with 3 reviews while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager writes "Smoothly handles software patching and scheduling, enabling monthly patch distribution across multiple projects". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Ivanti Security Controls and GFI LanGuard, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Quest KACE Systems Management, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune. See our Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager vs. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services report.
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.
