We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Patch Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The initial setup was easy."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"SCCM is a stable solution."
"One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined process has significantly improved our software distribution workflows."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its ability to deploy patches to nearly all applications."
"It gives us the ability to set up schedules, according to what our security requirements are, to automate the patching of our servers and desktops."
"Microsoft Configuration Manager is integrated with other Microsoft products."
"It's a stable product."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is very scalable."
"This solution captures all the devices in our infrastructure."
"GFI LanGuard could improve the rollback feature. If we have installed the wrong we have had some issues with the rollback function. Additionally, more input from GFI LanGuard for the custom software push install."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"The version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding more modules, such as asset control or asset inventory."
"The documentation on how to use this solution in a Linux environment is not clear, which is something that should be improved because it is complicated."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes."
"GFI LanGuard has some technical limitations with machines."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"The analysis is something that can be integrated. Their report analysis can be improved a little bit due to the fact that most of the time complaints policies are saved by the admins. It's something that we need to look into and search for."
"We'd like the solution to make it easier to manage remote users."
"The downside of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's an on-premise-based solution. With the pandemic coming on board the need to support users across the globe has increased. For a while, we would use the in-built Microsoft Teams screen sharing feature but the disadvantage of that is you cannot perform privileged access. Microsoft does not give you access to that. That's where you need cloud-based tools, such as BeyondTrust or Freshservice."
"Their compliance reporting is not accurate, and they admitted it on the phone when we had a call with them. We were trying to understand why their numbers didn't match on our compliance reports. It is not accurate and you cannot depend on the compliance reports. The numbers just don't match, and we can't figure out why. We called Microsoft and they said, "Yeah, that's a known issue." But there is no word that they're working on it."
"SCCM can improve on third-party application support."
"In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments."
"It would be better if automation options were available. For example, in Nexthink or SysTrack, there is an analytical tool. Creating dashboards would be very easy if you implement the same thing in Microsoft. That report will be a daily cost to the customers and good revenue for our organization. The price also could be better. In the next release, we need to include some features like tables, dashboards, surveys, services, and metrics in the dashboard. Whatever we are implementing will be downloaded by a report. Apart from the report, we will telecast from the dashboard. It's very easy to compare, and it will be easy to telecast to the end-users."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GFI LanGuard writes "A scalable, competitively priced solution with a good ROI and easy setup process ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager, BigFix and Kaseya VSA, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Microsoft Intune and Tanium. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager 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.