We performed a comparison between Device42 and Lansweeper 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."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 asset inventory is great because previously we had devices all over the place. We have been able to do multiscans to find devices that we didn't know about, which was great."
"It has agentless discovery; you don't need to put agents on your servers. You can open one or two ports to discover all your infrastructure."
"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."
"The topology layout is the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable part is the ease of use. There's no training involved. It's pretty simple and straightforward."
"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 solution is agentless."
"Its functionality is very solid. The best part about it is that, when you have issues in getting information back from nodes, it tells you what the issue is, and you can quickly go to the specific nodes and respond to or repair those. There is an agent option, but to me, as a small business, the preference is to avoid agents where possible because you probably don't have the staff to keep up with them all."
"One valuable feature is the ability to monitor log-on times, providing insights into whether users are rebooting their machines as claimed. This is useful in scenarios where users may not be aware of the need to reboot for system optimization. Lansweeper helps verify such information by collecting log data. Another noteworthy feature is the capability to track CPU, memory, and network usage on workstations at intervals, say every thirty minutes. This allows me to assess the user's experience and validate their claims about resource consumption. For instance, if a user complains about high memory usage, Lansweeper enables me to verify the actual usage and address the issue accurately. This level of monitoring granularity is something I find particularly useful and haven't seen in many other tools."
"Provides good reports from every asset."
"Lansweeper is very easy to use, and its technical support is very good."
"It is very flexible and very powerful. The reporting scripts that are continually posted are a real benefit. It makes it easier for someone who is a consumer, but not necessarily a power user, to quickly create and run reports, get updates, and know what tasks need to be performed."
"The solution provides inventory information that is very important to our company."
"We've found the most value right now in the inventory of the equipment."
"A great value is the fact that it supports multiple platforms, and it is agentless. Obviously, it still requires credentials, but being agentless makes it much easier to deploy, especially for a small business. It leaves fewer things to maintain. Especially for a small or medium business, it is a tremendous product."
"It was hard to know which assets I'd already looked at because if I looked up another asset with a similar name, they would still pop up. I would have to make sure I was looking at the right asset. The search function should be improved."
"Mapping items wasn't as intuitive as importing in Device42, so this is an area for improvement."
"For the iPhone, the device diagram cannot be downloaded. You have to go to each device and download the device diagram for that device. E.g., suppose there are a 1000 or 2000 servers. You cannot go to each server or device to download a device diagram for each device. There should be a one-click solution for downloading all device diagrams."
"My biggest problem with the product is the upgrades. First, we have to do them manually and second, not this last time but the time before that, we actually had to build a new VM to deploy the solution again. We had to back it up and then restore it to the new version. That was inconvenient."
"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 only thing which I have noticed so far that is not good is that we had an issue with some reporting from the tool, reporting we had to export. We couldn't do it in the way we wanted to, so we tried to reach out to their support but it took pretty long until we understood how we can manage the reports. We still haven't received a complete explanation of what we need to do and how to do it."
"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."
"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."
"Lacks an end-to-end asset management tool."
"The support is an area that could improve. The support staff could be more knowledgeable."
"The feature to deploy software in endpoints needs to be improved."
"I don't have any complaints about it, and I've never really had any issues. It isn't wizard-driven or anything like that, but it doesn't need to be. For someone who is not familiar with system administration, it would be daunting. There would be a lot of info there. They wouldn't necessarily know what to do, but that's not its target audience. For its target audience, in particular, it doesn't need to change. It is really a good tool."
"The support experience hasn't been satisfactory. Establishing a direct connection with someone is challenging, as communication is limited to chat or forums through a web link. There's a lack of direct interaction with support personnel, making it difficult to have real-time conversations or seek immediate assistance, which is not ideal."
"The help desk is not exactly its strong suit."
"It would be great if Lansweeper could combine security functions like vulnerability management."
Device42 is ranked 4th in IT Asset Management with 25 reviews while Lansweeper is ranked 9th in IT Asset Management with 7 reviews. Device42 is rated 8.4, while Lansweeper is rated 8.6. 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 Lansweeper writes "A powerful, cost-effective, and agentless solution that supports multiple platforms and is perfect for small and medium enterprises". Device42 is most compared with ServiceNow, ServiceNow CMDB, Infoblox IPAM, JIRA Service Management and ServiceNow Discovery, whereas Lansweeper is most compared with ServiceNow, ManageEngine IT Asset Management, Qualys VMDR, Spiceworks and BMC Helix Discovery. See our Device42 vs. Lansweeper 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.