We performed a comparison between Bigfix and Microsoft Windows Server Update Services based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: BigFix wins out in this comparison. The main difference between the two solutions is that Microsoft Windows Server Update Services users say deployment is complicated and that the product could benefit from better reporting.
"Software distribution and patch management are the most valuable."
"The most valuable features of the solution are Windows patching and the hardware and software inventory."
"The product is less costly when compared to other solutions, and this is a good solid solution for what we have paid."
"It is for multiple use cases. A lot of people are looking at it just for security, and that's really endpoint security. The endpoint management part of it in terms of being able to constantly do patching for Windows, Unix, macOS, Cloud, Raspberry, VMware, and all Linux flavors is important, and they are very good at that. They have support for virtually every OS on the market."
"Patch Management for a variety of operating systems makes it valuable as we can rely on a single tool for obtaining patch compliance of the entire compute infrastructure."
"The technical support for BigFix is really amazing."
"Patch management, because it very much improved the patch compliance and has the capability to manage Windows and non-Windows clients."
"The most valuable feature of BigFix is the software deployment."
"Setup is very simple and straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to identify which updates are needed on a particular machine."
"The most important aspect is that we can centrally deploy the updates that are necessary for the organization. It's important."
"Provides the ability to create multiple downstream servers."
"Once we configure it and it keeps updating the patches, all I need to do is filter out which patches are required or not."
"The interface is easy to use."
"We get server updates from the internet and from the Bluetooth server. All of the clients are connected to it, and they're all updated from this exact server. It updates automatically."
"The most valuable feature is Server Update's stability."
"I would like to see SDK for Web UI included in the next release."
"The product is quite buggy and complicated to use."
"Maybe the online help could be improved. It'd be nice if you would have a lot more phrases and keywords that you could search for and find answers with the help."
"They don't have a proper mobile device management capability. They're working on it, however, that's the one thing that needs improvement so that you can have full unified endpoint management."
"I would like better support on the backend."
"I would like to see more emphasis on using the web console, to have the same power as the full fat client console that they do they now. It's a lighter way to log in and it would be faster for our operators to do their work. The console tends to take a long time for a large number of clients."
"To make it a ten they should improve the licensing. Second, if they could have one environment for everything it would be nice. For you to install compliance you need to install the server, and then you add the modules. For you to install inventory you install the server and then you add the modules. It's not easy to do. When I was doing it before I learned it, it was not straight forward."
"I'd like to see better integration, with the different applications within BigFix. Instead of sometimes feeling like four or five different applications, they need to be integrated a little better within themselves."
"In the next release, I would like them to provide better connectivity. They must improve the connectivity between the WSS with Microsoft or the client."
"In the next release, I would like to see additional tools added to fix the engine issues on the client's side."
"Could be improved with additional features such as an update alarm."
"The database could be improved. In large environments, for example, we often get problems with reporting."
"The ability to have more fine control within this solution is very important. It is not available for the solution in its current state."
"User interface is outdated and not user-friendly."
"The product must improve its support."
"Because you have to pay for the product and there may be other good free solutions, this may not be the best choice for a cost-minded organization."
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
BigFix is ranked 2nd in Patch Management with 91 reviews while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 38 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Tanium and ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Quest KACE Systems Management, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune and GFI LanGuard. See our BigFix vs. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services report.
See our list of best Patch Management vendors.
We monitor all Patch 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.