We performed a comparison between BigFix and Red Hat Satellite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Technical support, in general, has been quite helpful."
"Application deployment and keeping the devices secure no matter where they are, by having this cloud solution — that has been great."
"It helps implement conditional access policies to restrict mobile users from accessing potentially dangerous emails."
"The performance of Microsoft Intune is good."
"As the solution is a software as a service, the scalability is unlimited."
"The ability to wipe data from and reset devices is one of the most important and valuable features. If a device is reported stolen, we can freeze it or wipe the data from it, preventing data leakage."
"The overall user experience is quite nice. I have no complaints from end users regarding their devices enrolled in Intune."
"This product offers an alternative solution to other UEM (Unified Endpoint Management) solutions."
"This has very much improved our organization by saving time to deploy thousands of endpoints to our customers."
"We are able to use BigFix through API connections to automate and reduce resources and time. The product's been great for us. It's increased the security posture ten-fold and it's increased our visibility across our endpoints enormously."
"It has improved reliability upon delivery of software and has also helped reduce software expenses. The extensibility of BigFix helps to create custom solutions where we may have considered purchasing something instead."
"One of the biggest benefits BigFix has had for our organization is the ease and efficiency to perform many different tasks, across pillars and platforms, all from one pane of glass."
"The most valuable features are patch management, software installation, and asset management."
"It has improved my organization because we can automate a lot of tasks. We went from manually patching machines or doing our best and having very little visibility into it to us being able to set it and forget it and getting really good results on first-pass patching."
"It has plugins development options, which are great."
"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."
"It has been a stable solution...It is a totally scalable solution."
"Technical support has been good."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"The compliance auditing helped me a lot."
"You don't need to depend on any third party. It's a complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system."
"The product allows us to handle patching for multiple servers at a time manually."
"Previously, we were using one server to update from a different repository over the HTTP. We had to manually manage the updates on the repository server. Satellite made the process easier."
"The product is convenient to use."
"We haven't really gone through all the features of Intune. We are just discovering them. Every day, we see a new feature that we want to apply, but what will be great for Intune is to be able to deploy apps in a simple fashion. We should be able to easily install various apps on the Windows platform, iOS, and Android. Currently, we have to write some scripts. It's not as straightforward as we would like it to be. It should be simplified so that we can do it just with three clicks—next, next, finish—without needing to write a script."
"There is no catalog for mobile access management (MAM) security."
"They need to add more group policies. Intune currently does not have many group policies that you can deploy. Its reporting, which is very limited at the moment, also needs improvement. It will be great if they can add report customization. Its stability needs to be improved. Sometimes, when you register a device in Intune, it doesn't show up instantly on the engine portal on the admin side. They need to provide better support for complicated issues. They also have a long turnaround time."
"The installation is very easy. However, to be able to configure it you will need special knowledge, such as training or self-studies to have a proper level of security. There are many settings one has to understand before being able to implement Microsoft Intune."
"It would be nice to have a location tracker for the mobile device management tool. I'm not sure if it exists but hasn't been configured or if it's missing, but we've been unable to utilize the location features."
"There is room for improvement in integration and security as well."
"The pricing could be improved."
"Deploying an app can be a complex process due to dependencies."
"It could use better integration with Hypervisor products like VMware."
"I would like to see the Self Service section made more user-friendly."
"I would like to see the integration of user security between the different products to be improved. There's separate security for compliance, separate security for web reports, and the console, and you have to manage those things separately."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"There is no support for patch management on SLES on IBM pSeries (only the Intel platform is supported)."
"I would like to see more custom content."
"I'd definitely like to see additional feature parody in the web UI versus the console. There are certain things that you can only do in the console and they're very cumbersome to do, like secure parameters, for example. That's definitely something that has a wide degree of utility but it needs to be easier to surface. At this particular juncture between the transition, between the legacy console and the web UI, it's hard to justify dealing with the cumbersome aspects of the legacy console when theoretically everything's been through the web UI."
"The reporting and dashboard parts have room for improvement."
"It is difficult to update and maintain."
"Satellite should be bundled with Ansible Tower and the Ansible Automation platform. We face challenges from a security perspective because we have micro-segmentation in our network. For each server we provision, we have to set permissions to different ports so that the servers can communicate with Satellite. If I have a single server with Satellite and the Ansible Automation Platform, it would be easier to manage security issues instead of having two or three products on various servers."
"The dashboard of Satellite is not encouraging. It does not adequately showcase all the functionality it offers."
"The solution's initial setup is a little bit tricky."
"They could make it more easy to use and improve the GUI so that it's more intuitive."
"Improving integration could lead to a more unified management experience for multiple operating systems within our data center."
"The documentation could be better."
"There could be a feature to simplify the process without the requirement of any patch manager subscription."
BigFix is ranked 5th in Configuration Management with 91 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Tanium and AWS Systems Manager, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, Microsoft Configuration Manager, AWS Systems Manager and vCenter Configuration Manager. See our BigFix vs. Red Hat Satellite report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration 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.