We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"We utilize the package management feature the most. We also use it for getting the inventory. Companies like us don't have an inventory or asset management system per se. A lot of companies, for instance, use SCCM as their asset management tool. We are using Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance for asset management, which is a good feature. The feature that I really like is to be able to upgrade to the Windows management systems or Windows version. It is very seamless, and I have found it fairly good."
"Feature-wise, I think it's more to do with the usability. It's pretty simple and it's got a very low learning curve, so that helps a lot. Feature-wise, things work pretty well as it's provided a lot of information available on the guides and the manuals, and things work as per the description."
"The most valuable features are the inventory and personalization."
"It shows the users that are currently logged in, which is not something that Active Directory by default will ever let you know up front."
"The nice thing about Spiceworks is always it's free. Monitoring of printers for low toner. Finding machines that have low memory or low hard disk space."
"It lets us know whether devices are getting out of date and tracked warranties. Spiceworks also gave me visibility in terms of what software was installed on each device and its status."
"Sometimes, it feels like the inventory it takes is not 100% accurate. I would say it is correct 90% of the time. We have had some issues. So, we have to rely on some factors of inconsistency in the data."
"The remote desktop tool they are using needs improvement. They have integrated some third-party tools for remote desktop connections but that is a bit complicated. That can be further simplified."
"Having an integrated asset management tool, where I can plug in things that are offline, would be good."
"The network mapping could be improved. Putting together an actual bonafide network map would be really nice."
"There are a lot of disadvantages to Spiceworks because it's not an agent-based solution."
"Once a device was recognized on the network, Spiceworks never got rid of it even after you took it off the network. You had to go in and manually remove it."
"It is less expensive as compared to SCCM."
Earn 20 points
The KACE Asset Management Appliance provides comprehensive hardware and software inventory and asset management across a variety of operating systems — Windows®, Mac®, Linux®, UNIX® and Chrome OS™, plus network-connected non-computing devices — through the entire IT asset lifecycle, giving you and your team more time to focus on IT innovation. Fast to implement and easy to use, this tool discovers all hardware and software on your network, and provides ongoing IT inventory management, IT asset management (ITAM) and software asset management (SAM).
Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is ranked 12th in IT Asset Management with 2 reviews while Spiceworks is ranked 6th in IT Asset Management with 4 reviews. Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is rated 7.0, while Spiceworks is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance writes "Everything works as per the description and it has a low learning curve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Spiceworks writes "Has good policy enforcement but the network mapping could be improved". Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is most compared with Qualys Asset Inventory, ServiceNow, Device42 and Freshservice, whereas Spiceworks is most compared with Zabbix, SolarWinds NPM, ServiceNow, Nagios Core and JIRA Service Management. See our Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance vs. Spiceworks report.
See our list of best IT Asset Management vendors.
We monitor all IT Asset 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.