Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

The tool's most valuable features are easy patch management and software deployment. We use it because it is a Microsoft product, which makes it more secure and easier to use.

Microsoft Configuration Manager makes it easier to control remote desktops. It supplements other products. 

The tool's deployment can be cumbersome. 

Microsoft Configuration Manager's stability is very good. I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We don't contact Microsoft directly for support. We get support through a third-party vendor. 

I rate the product's ease of deployment a four out of ten. 

A contractor helped us with the product's deployment. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

The primary use case of the solution is to deploy patches, and applications, and upgrade our client operating systems.

Without the solution, we would have to manually install all patches and software and upgrade our operating system with the help of our support team, which would take a long time. With SCCM, this process is automated, making it a highly valuable feature.

The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to deploy patches to nearly all applications.

SCCM should strive to enhance the accuracy of its reporting functions in order to avoid any issues with incorrect or inaccurate data.

Microsoft could supply an installation guide to make setup easier.

I have been using the solution for ten years.

The solution is stable and we have not had any issues.

The solution is scalable.

We have 100,000 people using the solution.

The technical support is good. We can call the hotline or use the website to generate the tickets.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Maintenance for the solution is easy.

I recommend the solution to others.

I am using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for software distribution and patch management.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the software deployment. Additionally, Microsoft integrates most of the other solutions well with one another.

The support could improve.

I have used Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately five years.

We are utilizing the solution on a regular basis.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager 

The availability of technical support could improve.

I rate the support from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager as seven out of ten. 

Neutral

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

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

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

It is used only for endpoints. We are trying to decide if it is useful for server-based evaluation as well. Like everybody else, we want to track what software is deployed. We have a one-half deployment of this product now, and I'm not sure if it's useful for what we want to do, which is server-based. It is designed to detect any PC. Thousands of people are using it this way, and it's not a new thing, but some people also seem to use the product for server-based detection, and it looks like there are modules you can download for Linux and other things to make it work beyond just the endpoint, which is what I am after.

It works well for the endpoints for the customer I'm consulting. It has a bunch of knobs, and you can tune it to do lots of things. 

It is designed to detect any PC. You can do it agent-based, or you can do it by some other method. If it is agent-based, then as long as the PC has the Endpoint Manager agent on it at the time when the batch job runs, it detects the hardware and software and puts it in the database. 

I'm looking for a single solution for all discovery needs. It fulfills about 40% of the requirements, and I'd like to see the other 60% so that I don't have to keep doing this.

I've been consulting in this space for five years. It has been used by the customer for years.

I don't have enough data on that. While I've been observing it, it has been stable.

When you buy it, you license it with a total number of devices to be managed, and that's a wall. When you hit the wall, you're going to need more licenses. So, you can scale right up to the spot where you have hit your boundary on licensing. To that boundary, it scales just fine.

I don't have any experience with their support.

This client uses seven or eight different things to perform this function of discovery. They use two different things for networks, and they use a hodgepodge of things to track VMware and Virtual Data Images (VDIs) and basically back of the envelope to track things that are on servers.

As far as I know, it is an annual operating expense license.

You may need complementary products to handle the holes not envisioned by SCCM.

For what it was designed to do, I would rate it a nine out of 10.

This solution helps to manage different areas. For example, asset inventory and software inventory. You are able to patch products, do software deployment, and software packaging. 

I have found some valuable features to be the built-in reporting tool, the ability to get visibility on your organization, compliance reports, software remitting for all your products in your organization, and the management of all machines in your environment including a new domain and workgroups.

I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on. For this purpose, I am looking for another solution to perform more efficiently and to work faster to cover this part specifically.

There should be more visibility to integrate more products other than Microsoft products. For example, Adobe and Google Chrome. You need to do a lot of manual intervention to cover all non-Microsoft products for patching at the moment. There are third parties working on these gaps in this solution. 

I have been using the solution for 12 years.

The solution is stable most of the time.

I have found the solution to be scalable. We have around 50,000 users using the solution.

We were satisfied with the support sometimes. There were occasions when we have had an engineer that was not experienced in the particular problem we encountered to be able to help efficiently. This could be improved by having better-trained engineers.

The specifications for the SCCM and the organizational capacity can make the installation complex otherwise it can be easy.

The deployment took a long time. We required a team system engineer from Microsoft to be allocated with my team to complete any configuration.

We are currently looking for another solution to work in parallel to cover some of the gaps in functionality.

I rate SCCM an eight out of ten.

We are using it for software deployment. Our network team uses this solution. It is mostly our tier-two team. 

We're on the latest version.

Software deployment and WSUS are most valuable.

There should probably be better remote support. They should also continue to improve on patch management, patching, and creating or turning products in software into deployable apps.

We have been using this solution in our organization for ten years.

The version that we have is MEMCM, and it works fine.

I've had interaction with Microsoft support, and their support is fine. It is what it is. It is always nice if it is better, but I certainly don't have any complaints.

I don't look at it from an ROI perspective. It provides what we need. It is a critical piece of infrastructure. If you want to run networking and support devices, you have no choice. You have to have it.

I would rate SCCM a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for client management, especially for day-to-day operational activities, like access management or software deployment.

The main key feature that we find the most valuable is the patching. The remote desktop is a very useful feature as well. The software deployment aspect is helpful too. These are the three core features from which we see the customers really benefit if they have a System Center Config Manager. This is especially true for enterprise organizations here.

Microsoft is being very competitive right now, and they are really investing in a lot of new features to be more competitive in the marketplace. 

We are okay with all the available features.

In the future, we're looking for tighter integration with cloud solutions like Windows Intune. It is already there, however, it's still in need of some improvements. It's not straightforward in terms of the administration on offer. 

We'd like the solution to make it easier to manage remote users.

It offers a very difficult cloud gateway when it comes to cloud management.

The solution does need a lot of configuration and fine-tuning, so a company will need a dedicated person who's knowledgeable in the product to manage it.

A few people complained that SCCM is very complex without CPS, depending on the SQL database, and when using SQL as a backend service. Sometimes updating the dashboard and getting the reports, can be slow. They're not getting an instant update on the database. That is where most of the customers tend to complain. 

I've been using the solution since version 2.0 or something close to that. It may be at least 15 years.

We don't have very many issues in SCCM. It's not a plug and play software, however. From time to time it does require fine-tuning. You need the right management and administrative people in place to manage the product. This is essential in order to keep it running correctly.  

We have clients in both the private and public sectors. 

The solution requires fine-tuning and configuration tweaks. In order to scale it, you will need a knowledgeable person to manage the process.

Technical support from Microsoft has been good. We've been satisfied with their level of service.

We don't find the initial setup to be complex. We've done many implementations a this point, and we find it to be straightforward. Our team is very much experts at this point. They know all the processes and they go through everything step by step. 

In terms of how long it takes to deploy the solution, this question is very tricky. It's all dependant on the customers, and their environment as well as the customer's readiness to proceed. If it's a POC, where I don't have any dependencies on the customer side, that everything will be within the private network, isolated environment, I can handle a deployment within two days. We can install, configure, and make everything ready in that short amount of time simply because we don't have customer dependencies.

You do need to have the correct people in place to manage it once it's up and running. They need to be experienced and dedicated to the product.

We're an integrator and service provider here in Bahrain, so we have done more than a couple of installations, so where our team is very confident in our ability to implement the solution on behalf of our clients.

We're actually looking at ServiceNow as a potential product to use in the future.

We are a Microsoft gold partner.

We're noticing many users in our country moving away from Microsoft and towards AWS.

We tend to use the latest solution, or something close to that. We always are trying to keep it up to date in all the customer database and systems. Whenever there is the latest update available, we update everything immediately for our customers. The latest version may be 19.06.

While all the customers we have are currently on-prem, we are looking for cloud-based solutions going forward, due to the fact that our customers tend to gravitate towards the cloud. They are like looking for something they can easily manage. That's all clients, irrespective of whether they are in the office or are our mobile users. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I really like the product, however, there's always room for improvement.

The primary use case of this solution is the application and device management for any windows desktop and mobile device clients.

The most valuable feature is the restriction of data transfer between unmanaged applications and managed applications, specifically on mobile devices. For example, if a user wants to transfer data from email to WhatsApp, that can be restricted.

The solution can be improved by speeding up the synchronizing of the policies on the devices. Technical support can benefit from shortened response times and making sure all of the support team are at par with their knowledge regarding the solution.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable. We currently have seven to nine thousand users.

The solution is scalable to match our needs.

The technical support team's response time can be slow at times and some people are more knowledgeable than others depending on who you have assigned to the ticket.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward. I give it an eight out of ten for ease.

The price is competitive and reasonable. I would give the solution an eight out of ten on price.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

The solution doesn't require any maintenance from our end because it is a cloud-based solution and Microsoft takes care of everything. 

The solution is easy to integrate with the durations and application, and administration is also very simple. When you go with the combination of licenses, the cost is also good, and reasonable.