We performed a comparison between OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management and SaltStack based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Red Hat, Microsoft, HCLTech and others in Configuration Management."The initial setup is not complex."
"It has improve our organization through the remote management of non-domain joined devices."
"Mobile device management is most valuable."
"The initial setup is not overly complex or difficult."
"The ability to switch between Affinity and non-Affinity enrollment is great."
"I believe that the solution is actually in Gartner's top quadrant at the moment for mobile device management."
"The synchronization of Intune with other Microsoft solutions is a valuable feature."
"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."
"Helps me perform changes in connected infrastructure thanks to the discovery features."
"The most valuable feature is the impact analysis."
"SaltStack has given us the ability to deal with systems at scale and rectify issues at scale."
"I want to build automation that is intelligent, part of the fabric of our environment, and is somewhat self-sustaining. I think SaltStack can help me do this."
"The ability to programmatically describe the desired state of a single, or an entire fleet of servers, on-premises, and in a cloud environment."
"The automation functionality has been most valuable. With a click of a button, we are able to automate provisioning, the build of new hardware and apply patches. These are all extremely important and differentiated tasks that can be automated in SaltStack."
"The product’s most valuable feature is its ability to provide environmental security."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"We monitor the configurations against CIS standards. We run CIS benchmarks and maintain configurations with higher CIS values for each server."
"An area for improvement is the absence of seamless integration, particularly with external dashboards."
"It would be great to see on-premises mailboxes and for the solution to have geofencing capabilities."
"The reports that are generated aren't so great. They don't give a lot of meaning so far, but that could be down to user knowledge than the actual reporting side of things. I'm not a big user of it, but I was a bigger user of MaaS360, and we used to be able to run weekly and monthly reports. In the case of any deviations. we'd get a warning immediately. That's not so easy to do or to get in place for Intune. This could be just a user issue, but when I compare both, that's the only thing that's lacking for me."
"Lacking in features such as Wi-Fi and network security."
"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."
"I'd like some more reporting so that I don't have to delve into PowerShell and I can pull more of the local device information such as memory, apps installed, etc. It would be nice to be able to see the apps that are present there but might not be managed. For example, if they installed 7Zip, it could report that back via an installed program or feature to see what was currently installed."
"A new Intune feature allows application packaging, but it incurs additional licensing costs for a significant number of applications."
"Intune doesn't provide much control over Windows servers. It's something we struggle with."
"The native UI should be simplified because it is outdated and a little bit over-complicated."
"There is a little bit of pain when it comes to libraries and what is needed to run the product."
"Its configuration process could be better."
"A hardened set of tests would be much appreciated."
"This solution could be integrated with more hardware for an improved offering."
"It is difficult to set up."
"SaltStack's features are minimal."
"Web UI."
More OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Earn 20 points
OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is ranked 21st in Configuration Management while SaltStack is ranked 14th in Configuration Management with 33 reviews. OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is rated 8.0, while SaltStack is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management writes "It allows us to deploy applications and primitive desktops globally. The upgrade cycle is very long". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SaltStack writes "Orchestration tool that powers automation of processes with the click of a button". OpenText ZENworks Configuration Management is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Quest KACE Systems Management and BigFix, whereas SaltStack is most compared with VMware Aria Automation, HashiCorp Terraform, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and BMC TrueSight Server Automation.
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.
