We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager 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."The conditional access policies that we set up are very useful."
"The security-related tools are excellent; these features allow us to secure devices, lock them down, and ensure compliance."
"I like that it's very good and very simple. I found that we just needed to have a proper subscription for an Intune tenant, and from the subscription, if we have the right role assigned, like the global admin role or the owner role, we can use Microsoft cloud resources. With the help of that, we can do many things like setting up Microsoft Intune in the cloud to create our virtual machines. All these can be done, and the steps are very simple. I really liked it. I like features like Windows Auto-Enrollment. I like it very much because whenever you supply it to the end-user, it will be ready to use immediately. The end-user only needs to provide the user credentials, and then they are good to go. I also really like Cloud PC, which was recently launched on Azure."
"We have one MDM that works with Windows, iOS, and Android."
"One of the best features is Windows Autopilot because if you change any of your devices, whatever security policies and compliance policies that applied can be easily migrated to the new devices. Windows Autopilot gives you that flexibility."
"It has a useful device management feature."
"Autopilot is the most valuable feature."
"It's easy to manage and easy to configure."
"The most valuable features are application deployment and task-sequenced imaging."
"The scalability to deploy the package."
"The solution has a very good set of features."
"The most valuable feature is the graphical-based reports of software updates that have been successful, the ones that have failed, and a summary of where the failures are what security breaches may occur."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"This has made the management of our environment easier."
"Endpoint Manager is valuable to our organization because it allows us to connect to our enterprise from remote locations securely. The most useful feature is its robustness and scalability. It is highly scalable and flexible, allowing us to use it in various environments. Additionally, we can specialize the policies related to each device group. This ensures that each group has access to the applications they need for their work and non-work hours."
"We are happy with the collaboration of SCCM with Patch My PC, which allows us to do patch work."
"The product is convenient to use."
"It cuts down significantly on the administrative time it takes to patch systems in a large environment."
"The product helps me to manage a large number of servers from one console."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is vulnerability management."
"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."
"Fixing is the most valuable. When you deal with a lot of hardware and software and you have a lot of packages, fixing is a bit difficult. You need to track and pull up all such things, but Satellite makes this task easy. We have branches in other locations, and I can manage other branches by using Satellite Capsule, which is a great feature."
"The most valuable features of Red Hat Satellite are its support, simplicity, and patch management."
"Additional application deployment options e.g. MSI deployment with more complex parameters or additional side-by-side files, and non-MSI deployment options."
"The closest Microsoft Intune can be to GPOs, the better. There needs to be more granularity on application deployments. However, they have done better recently with the application deployments."
"It would be better if they can reduce the cost of the license."
"Lacks the ability to deploy more ways of management, managing devices and processing the policies."
"Could benefit from user having more control over devices."
"We would like to see support for Chrome and/or devices for Chromebooks."
"There is no catalog for mobile access management (MAM) security."
"It should be simplified. I've worked with many different mobile device management solutions, and Intune is one of the more complex ones. It could be more simplified, and some of it is related to the wording that is being used, such as a configuration profile versus a policy. They really should have had different names to make it less confusing."
"The product needs to improve scalability."
"I want the system to provide some dependency relations. I would also like to see the relationship between different machines."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"I would like to see more automation."
"Built in PowerShell cmdlets would be a nice feature because managing clients remotely can be a pain without knowing the WMI calls to run."
"SCCM can improve on third-party application support."
"Troubleshooting in general needs improvement. There's just a ton of logs to go through, and so finding the error log that corresponds with that you're doing can sometimes be difficult."
"The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed."
"It should basically include a complete slew of system management and monitoring tools such as Nagios. It should be a single pane of glass that gives us a complete solution. It is a good solution, but it is missing a few important things. We're using Capsule for DMVs on other secured zones. Capsule is a part of Satellite to be a proxy of sorts."
"The dashboard of Satellite is not encouraging. It does not adequately showcase all the functionality it offers."
"Regarding the product's ability to support third-party tools, Red Hat doesn't support all the layers from the open-source version of Linux."
"The product's automation capabilities need enhancement."
"It wasn't easy in the beginning, and some effort was required to work it out. I already had the product documentation, but it was not well organized. It wasn't easy to follow. There were a lot of documents here and there."
"There needs to be some margin for improvement in terms of the way Satellite manages subscriptions. It is still very confusing when we have different contracts or different bundles of subscriptions, and we need to manage those within Satellite in a way that's very user-friendly."
"I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user."
"Red Hat Satellite has a short life cycle and we constantly need to update."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". 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". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Quest KACE Systems Management, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Chef. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager 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.