We performed a comparison between Device42 and Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two IT Asset Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The pricing is reasonable."
"A big plus for Device42 was the auto-discovery. With it, we have updated devices, updated systems, and up-to-date systems."
"We use the automatic IT asset discovery for different things, like VMware discovery and SNMP discovery for network devices. It helps us to keep hardware information up to date in Device42, and the VMware discovery helps us to keep virtual device inventory up to date... We are sure to have 100 percent of our devices in Device42. Not more, not less."
"Previously, our company had a lot of issues keeping track of all the data centers and the inventory, as well as the purchase orders. All of these were managed by other tools. The good thing about Device42 is that it can be used for all this together. We don't need to spend time checking many other tools and files."
"They've also just created some new interactive dashboards. CEOs can see and interact with the data rather than scrolling through endless Excel worksheets to find what they need."
"The auto-discovery is brilliant. You can have it scheduled to run on a regular basis, and the infrastructure is always getting updated within the platform. I would rate the asset discovery very highly. It's very comprehensive. It covers quite a lot of different methods for doing discovery and it supports a lot of different types of hardware as well."
"The REST API abilities enables us to run scripts that pull information from our servers about software, storage, etc. Anything we need is pushed through REST API to the Device42 server and reflected in the report it generates."
"Device42 has everything in one place and links it altogether. This helps when you need to figure out where things are going wrong, where things are happening, or how everything is linked together."
"The platform offers efficient stability."
"The solution is scalable."
"We use the solution for IT service desk management and asset management."
"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."
"We have a support team here in India that has been helpful. We have not reached out to the global support for Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance."
"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."
"The resources table needs a few tweaks. We've raised a feature request for this. When you click on resources, it opens up the entire CMDB or the entire data stored in Device42. If that could be customizable, it would be good. We should be allowed to add our own columns to that by writing a script or something like that. There should be an option to add or limit whatever we want."
"Configuring rPDUs in the data center for Device42 required us to add multiple discovery jobs. The rPDUs were referred to the ISPDUs and daisy-chained. They would automatically assign a unique SMP port, but Device42 didn't allow SMP ranges, so we had to create a discovery job for each rPDU individually. We submitted a feature request to mitigate that."
"When servers have two network adapters, automatically discovered will be only one network card because the other one is a backup. Device42 has some problems to find the other connection."
"The architecture is a bit old-fashioned. Device42 is on one server, appliance, virtual machine, or guest. We are loading more into Device42 than it can hold. Overloading Device42 with REST API calls or tasks will directly impact every aspect because the server will be too busy to answer requests."
"Device42 is a main part of our processes. We need reliability, not only in terms of the data but with the solution itself. It's really difficult when we have 10 minutes of Device42 downtime because none of our teams can work for those 10 minutes, and it's more time lost if there is longer downtime. An improvement would be to have a cluster implementation of Device42 to have high-availability and ensure that we don't have downtime in case of failure."
"In my experience I believe that the key concern is the pricing strategy of the solution. Instead other solutions such as lanweber are much more cost effective. Previously, Device42 operated on perpetualysis without any fees. But recently they have altered the pricing model to include a subscription fee which I see as a very costly affair. Therefore I would like to suggest that they evaluate their pricing strategy and licence scheme, conduct a market research and ensure that they provide the right product in the market at the right price."
"It would be nice for the agent to have an installer versus a single file across multiple systems."
"A con for Device42 is that Kubernetes integration is lacking. You pay for 10,000 spot licenses and if you're spinning up a Kubernetes cluster, or four or five or six Kubernetes clusters like we do, you're going to have 5,000 or 6,000 nodes in each of those, doing different types of business things."
"The first thing I don't like about KACE is that it needs to have a proper service desk. The categories and the command section do not reflect the users and the permanent users porting commands on updating. There is an issue and delay in loading the commands. We also want a proper structure for infrastructure management. Also, the AI chatbot and user template options are missing."
"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."
"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."
"Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance could improve areas related to the management of updates, especially concerning new operating systems."
"The initial setup was burdensome."
"Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance can improve by incorporating AI and machine learning into the solution."
More Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance Pricing and Cost Advice →
Device42 is ranked 6th in IT Asset Management with 25 reviews while Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is ranked 15th in IT Asset Management with 6 reviews. Device42 is rated 8.4, while Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is rated 7.4. The top reviewer of Device42 writes "Good reporting and discovery capabilities, and helpful for understanding device dependencies and asset management". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance writes "Has efficient stability and works well in Linux environment ". Device42 is most compared with ServiceNow, ServiceNow CMDB, Infoblox IPAM, JIRA Service Management and BMC Helix Discovery, whereas Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance is most compared with ServiceNow. See our Device42 vs. Quest KACE Asset Management Appliance 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.