Automox Reviews

We primarily use it on the endpoint management and on the server.

It is very simple and straightforward to use. 

Technical support is helpful.

They can scale well.

It's easy to deploy agents to endpoints. 

They need to improve the automation features. 

It could be more stable. 

I've been using the solution for one year. 

The solution is not very stable. Some of the features we tested or used would not work as expected. I'd rate the stability six out of ten. 

The solution can scale and is straightforward to extend. You can place it on as many endpoints as you like. I'd rate the scalability seven out of ten. We have around 4,000 end users. 

I do not have plans to increase usage. I stopped using it recently.

Support is very helpful if you run into issues. It's quite good. They are fast, knowledgeable, and responsive.

Neutral

I've never used a different solution.

We just need to deploy the agent to the endpoints. We don't need to set up anything. For a single agent, it takes one or two minutes. However, we deployed globally, and you need to take into consideration the time it will take to deploy across each endpoint. It's very simple to deploy. 

We had three or four engineers take care of the implementation. 

We deployed the solution ourselves. 

We have not witnessed any ROI.

We do pay a monthly licensing fee. 

I'd rate the pricing as average. It's not cheap yet not too expensive. 

You can also pay for more support if you require them to provide consultancy services. 

This is a cloud-based version that updates by itself automatically. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate the solution seven out of ten overall. 

It's good for endpoints. However, it's not as good on the server end. There is overhead for you when you deploy on the server. 

We use it for patch management. It is used for patching servers and workstations.

We're using the web version.

Its flexibility is most valuable.

It should have integrated workstation access. So, there should be a remote desktop feature.

We dealt with it for a couple of months.

It has been pretty stable.

It should be easy. We're probably going the opposite way. We're not going to be doing much scaling up. If anything, we'll be scaling down.

There are three people who use this solution. They are from desktop support and server infrastructure.

I never had to contact them other than during the implementation.

It wasn't complex at all.

Its licensing for a year was nine grand. There was no additional fee.

It is a flexible solution that does a majority of the tasks. The only thing it really doesn't do is Mac, which is something that Jamf Pro does, but it is not necessary.

I would rate it a nine out of 10.