Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

For me, the primary use cases of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager are in construction and architecture, where I assist in customizing the tools to achieve optimal performance at a confidential level. I have a team for level three and level four, which presents different scenarios and new features available for integration and customization to upgrade the SCCM restriction. I perform all tasks related to the product.

I am most familiar with the software update features. I also have expertise in analytics. In addition, I specialize in software updates and operating system deployment, which involves managing the endpoint solution.

There is room for improvement in one of the areas. Sometimes there are different compartments and problems with the web server, which makes it difficult to identify performance issues. Here, more tools configuration may be needed to address this. However, there are manual logs available for all modules and configuration actions.

There is one feature that is not present, which is antivirus monitoring. I would like to see this feature in the next release and also the integration of the module of monitoring of configuration directly into the configuration concept, to avoid having separate scopes for communication and configuration engineering. This would eliminate the need for multiple dashboards available for managers on the platform.

I started working on the software in 2010. It has been more than ten years since. Moreover, I have worked with all the older versions, and the last version I used was 22.07.

The product is very stable compared to older versions. The configuration is easy to upgrade, and if there is a problem with a combined server, the user can roll back to a previous version. Additionally, there are many tools available for covering different aspects of the product, which makes it a very important configuration.

It is a scalable solution and better suited for big companies.

It is not easy to get good technical support, especially at level one. It is difficult for the support team to understand the scope of the problem and provide specific solutions. The technical support is not good for me, but it depends on the comparison with other software functionalities. It's difficult to find a good support technician at Microsoft.

The initial setup is not complex, and the deployment time can vary depending on the company's size and the deployment's specific needs. Moreover, the solution can be started quickly if you have a server and a schedule with the primary setting.

The maintenance of the solution depends on the scope of the company's usage. For example, a large company may need a tracking system deployment and a team of four engineers for maintenance.

Additionally, there is a need for fees in order to implement changes, and there may be a charge of 30-40% for a different scope.

The price is reasonable, especially if the user has an active directory and can buy a configuration after buying the firmware.

My advice is to check the configuration for each customer, as it varies for each consumer. Staff should be trained to use Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager easily. Configuration is key, and it is used in the good projects of Microsoft. The project is simple, but people who manage it need to think simply.

Overall, I would rate the product an eight out of ten.

We use MECM for intelligent logic automation. About 400,000 users are impacted by the solution, but there are around 20 admins who work with it directly. We have multiple automation tools and use the one that makes sense as needed.

We're designing PowerShell scripts to automate patching the boot process. The ROI is there.

I like the data collection. 

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.

I have used MECM for about four or five months.

I rate MECM nine out of 10 for stability. 

I rate MECM eight out of 10 for scalability.

I haven't gotten support from Microsoft for MECM, but I've contacted them in the past for various tickets. They're professional.

I work in the lab. I design a solution before it's deployed in production. I wasn't involved in the actual deployment. Deploying things in the lab is different. It's a much smaller footprint.

So far, the ROI is pretty decent.

MECM is more expensive than Ansible, which is open and free. That's why we'll use other tools as needed for automation. 

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager seven out of 10. You need to have the right mindset to use it. The first question should always be: Can this be automated? From there, you'll see if the product will satisfy their automation requirements.

We use Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for application deployment and patching. We run the gamut, and we use it for quite a bit.

To do what we are doing with the configurations manager manually would be impossible. We have over 100,000 systems, and it simplifies a lot of what we are doing. The reporting aspect allows you to report on patch compliance, etc. It just simplifies a lot of things.

I like a lot of the reporting capabilities and baseline configurations.

Some of the capabilities aren't fully developed yet. It's an ongoing work in progress. I think they are making some steps in the right direction as far as managing workstations centrally, like Intune. 

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for over ten years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is stable.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a nine. 

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is very scalable. We probably have 150,000 users right now.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give scalability a nine.

The initial setup is a bit challenging. We have a relatively complex environment. It's a little bit more complicated than it might be for a smaller environment. It can be relatively straightforward, but there are some twists in our environment.

We implemented this solution.

I would tell potential users that it's a worthwhile solution for any company that has to manage a lot of systems. It's a great tool.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight.

The primary use case of the solution is to deploy the computers and servers.

The most valuable feature is that it integrates well with other Microsoft solutions.

The solution can be improved with the addition of a mobile device manager.

I have been using the solution for three years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The implementation was completed in-house.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

I recommend the solution because it functions as advertised. The solution is user-friendly and easy to learn. The solution has a nice-looking interface, unlike others out there.

Microsoft Configuration Manager gives different tools in one solution. 

The tool's deployment is complex and depends on the architecture you want to implement. 

The solution is stable.

The tool is scalable. 

I rate Microsoft Configuration Manager a ten out of ten. 

I am using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for patch management and asset inventory.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's incredibly simple to configure and execute changes in bulk, allowing for seamless deployment. With this solution, you can easily track the status of all modifications and send them with ease, making it a comprehensive and efficient solution for any necessary adjustments.

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 have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately one and a half years.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We have approximately 10,000 users using the solution.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a ten out of ten.

I use Tanium in parallel with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. Tanium is a similar solution that has features, such as asset patching, and encryption, and can be configured around Microsoft assets.

The initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is simple.

There is an annual license needed to use the solution.

This tool is helpful for Microsoft assets but it is important to have clear visibility before implementation. It can be a complete solution but a plan.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We are using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager to manage our client's Microsoft estate. 

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the availability of being able to manage the Microsoft estate. It handles many areas, such as asset management and tracking.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could improve the integration.

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately 10 years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is highly stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is good.

The support for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is good.

We did not face any challenges with the initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. The time it takes to do the deployment depends upon the size of the environment. Smaller deployments don't take more than a week and very large deployments can take up to three to six months.

The support staff needed for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager depends upon the size of the deployment. However, we do not require a large number of people to support it. 

Microsoft comes with an end-to-end package that can include Office 365 and many other applications put together, it makes it a very integrated system for people to use.

We have a support license from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager and the overall price of the solution is reasonable.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

It is used for software deployments, PC operating system deployments, and security patch deployments.

Currently, we are using it on-premises, but we are slowly moving to the cloud solution that is called Intune or Microsoft Endpoint Management (MEM).

We have high availability for all of our deployments. We can trust this platform for all our deployments. We are quite happy with the fact that we can do what we want to do. It fulfills our goals for all deployments.

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. 

One area of improvement is regarding the patching of Office 365 products. We have some difficulties on this side, and it can be improved.

Their support should be improved. Mostly, when we are doing patches on Microsoft 365 clients, we need to escalate to Microsoft support. It takes a long time to get to someone in their support team who has good knowledge of the product. Their support at level one is not quite helpful and knowledgeable.

In my previous company, we deployed SCCM two years ago.

And in my current company, I have been using this solution for more than one year.

Its stability is quite good, and its performance is quite good. There is nothing to complain about.

It is scalable, but we are far from reaching that limit. We don't have any problem with its scalability.

We have three people working on the SCCM side. In terms of the implementation, we have 6,000 PCs that have this installed. It is being used daily.

Mostly, when we are doing patches on Microsoft 365 clients, we need to escalate to Microsoft support. We are not quite happy with the support because it takes a long time to get to someone who is knowledgeable. When we have a tricky issue like this, it is very complicated to get appropriate support. We lose a lot of time with Microsoft support before we find someone who is able to understand and resolve the issue. 

Positive

We were previously working with BigFix. I also worked with HPE's solution. As compared to these two products, SCCM is much more integrated with the Microsoft ecosystem. We are fully on Windows, so it is much easier for us to manage our PCs with SCCM. It is easier to have a Microsoft product on Microsoft operating systems.

It is a Microsoft product, and we have an efficient team that is managing the solution. We have a lot of people who have the knowledge of doing its setup. So, deployment is not an issue for us. If you know the product, it is quite easy. You just need the knowledge of the product.

From the beginning to the end, it took about six months. It was deployed on all PCs.

We mainly had two people for its implementation. I managed the deployment, and I had one external resource who helped me in implementing the full product. To implement it, we needed to integrate all of the enterprise applications. This integration of the enterprise applications was outsourced, and there were a few people involved.

For its maintenance, we have a resource in India who is managing the solution. We need one full-time administrator for managing the solution. We also have one person who is integrating new applications and updates with this platform.

Its licensing is quite complicated because we are getting the license not only for SCCM but for the full Microsoft package. We don't need to pay for a separate license. We need to have one license that includes everything we need, such as Windows, Microsoft 365, SCCM, encryption, and so on. So, we don't have a specific price for it. Perhaps, it is good that it includes the full suite of licensing of Microsoft. It is expensive, but we are getting a lot of features.

In the next release, we are moving to the cloud, which also fits the strategy of Microsoft. We would like that the features on the cloud side are very similar to what we have on the on-premise side. We are looking to move to the cloud with Intune, but Intune is not like SCCM in terms of the features. We prefer that they develop all the features on the cloud.

I would recommend others to go for it if they are using any other solution to manage their Windows or Microsoft environment. It will make life easier. I would also recommend others to check the cloud solution before implementing the on-premise solution. They can see what can be done on the cloud. Cloud is not fully ready to replace the on-premise solution, but they can do some of the parts on the cloud and some of the parts on-premises.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.