ManageEngine Endpoint Central Reviews

Our primary use case is to manage most aspects of the endpoints in 21 remote sites. All sites are connected via IPSec VPN mesh and have distribution servers at each site, OS deployment, software deployment, patch management, remote administration, configurations, mobile device management, and browser management. One of my favorite features is a simple remote CMD. This enables us to troubleshoot certain things without interfering with the user desktop session or needing to ask them to take remote control of the machine. It's very valuable being able to fix a problem without stopping user productivity.

It has become a single pane of glass for a majority of client support and administration. It has enabled my team to quickly identify machines, who is using it, what applications are installed, and a huge set of tools to solve most problems. OS imaging and deployment has significantly reduced the amount of time and resources needed to deploy a large set of new computers or even just reimage a problematic PC because of malware or other problem that would take much longer to troubleshoot. Software deployment has taken the task of installing a common application on hundreds of computers to just a few clicks.

Honestly, I have to say all features together have become the Swiss army knife of desktop management. They all work hand in hand. Software deployment saves an unbelievable amount of time installing an application on hundreds of computers. A full suite of remote administration tools to troubleshoot problems or make a change via PowerShell without intruding on the user desktop. Mobile device management eliminated the problem of missing iPads or iCloud locked tablets and phones. The mundane process of patch management is now a breeze.

I really feel like asset explorer should be a component of desktop central. That would make it the ultimate desktop management tool. This would also simplify the asset management role since an agent is already being deployed and assets could be added at the same time.  the CMDB would be quickly populated with a PC hardware and software inventory along with user relationships. Device assignment and tracking would be another added value. Adding that feature set would tie everything together and be the one-stop-shop of desktop management suites.

Approximately a year.

It's very stable it just seems to always work.

Very scalable. Distribution servers are the main factor.

The few times we have contacted customer support they have always very quickly solved the problem. Every support agent has been very professional and curteous. 

We did not use a different solution. We did a trial Desktop central and immediately fell in love with it and have not regretted the decision.

It was very easy to setup initially. The side effect is you will spend a lot of time tweaking and fine-tuning everything. 

In-house.

Time saved is money saved.

Go with what you can afford. Every part of the application is going to save time and money and a very worthwhile investment.

We did not evaluate competing products. Everything we were looking for was there and worked well and was easy to use.

We carried out a POC on Desktop Central before implementing and it's been in production for two months. Our use case is for patching third-party applications and Windows applications. We use the solution extensively so that aside from the monthly scanning we use it to work on Microsoft vulnerabilities.

We are customers of Desktop Central and I'm an IT Manager. 

Previously, our monthly maintenance would have taken about eight hours, and two or three people continuously on a laptop. Our maintenance is now carried out by this solution and once it's done there just needs to be a check for errors. It's time-saving and resource-saving which is pretty good!

The patch management is really wonderful, it's effortless and just a matter of building a few configurations and creating a few templates which can be reused. The UI is quite good and user-friendly. 

There are a few basic things that haven't been configured in the tool. We're dealing with 600, 700 servers. The way the solution has been configured means you can only see 500 systems at a time. The company has acknowledged that this is an issue but they haven't worked on it yet. It's a little strange given the amount of time the product has been on the market. 

We're working on migrating to Azure. It involves a new patch that was not picked up by Desktop Central. I think it's a problem for them because Azure is everywhere right now and they don't seem to be up to date with the new patches. More needs to be included because everything Microsoft is launching now is more related to Azure.

I've been using this solution for six months. 

Performance is good and stable. If it's working on 600 servers at a time, there is a 90-minute window that it uses to communicate with its agent, and that's divided between all the servers. It can hamper performance at times when compared to other tools where you just click and everything is communicated without any wait time. The IT Ops team uses Desktop Central which, in our company, is two or three people. 

We haven't yet scaled but I believe it will be quite easy. 

We were using batchpatch earlier.

All the ManageEngine products are pretty straightforward when it comes to implementation. There are a few configurations you have to do on a network level for the codes, but it's not complicated. I carried out the deployment with one other person. We contacted the vendor a few times for some assistance but that was it. The POC took about a month and the actual deployment took a week to 10 days including configuring everything on the network level.

In terms of maintenance, the server and installed agent need to be updated on all servers. You do have to check it on your test environment to make sure everything is compatible with a virtual environment, otherwise it could crash your VM. 

The solution is relatively cheap because we purchased the full package. For now, we're only using patch management, but it offers many other things such as software deployment, the ability to create configuration packages and install new software. There are no additional costs to the licensing fee. 

We only recently started using Desktop Central, so we're comparing the results with another solution use, BatchPatch. The Desktop Central UI is very good and easy to use. BatchPatch is a cheaper product so it's more complicated and the UI is not as good. What BatchPatch does have that's lacking in Desktop Central is the granular representation of progress and what's happening on the backend. BatchPatch gives you a clear picture of what's happening step by step and progress per server; it gives you specific errors so you can check and troubleshoot. Desktop Central lacks that visibility. If you're carrying out maintenance of 600 servers, you need to have that visibility, so that if something's not right, you can look into it instead of having to wait eight hours.

If you're new to the solution, check your requirements because the solution is not suitable for every situation. We're using it for a data center, so we configured it differently. If, for example, you're dealing with local laptops on office premises and you're looking to do patch management, a product like Ivanti might be more useful. For us, Desktop Central is pretty good because we are working on servers, and the vulnerability checks we do on the security base are pretty high, so the patch management option of Desktop Central is pretty good. 

There is room for improvement, so I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

We use the product to know about our assets and manage remote support. 

The tool's security can be better. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

The tool is stable. 

The solution is scalable. My company has 7000 users for the product. 

We don't require any support from the product since we have a good engineer. 

The product's setup is easy. We have around 45 people to manage the tool. 

The solution's deployment was done in-house. 

I have seen ROI with the tool's use. 

The product is cheap. 

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

I used it about six months ago. We implemented it in the last company I worked with. We were using it for patching, rolling out images, and other similar things.

We were using the most recent version.

I like being able to image over the network. That's a nice feature that it has. Patch management is pretty decent on it as well.

The only problem with it is that the setup isn't very intuitive. I know that they just upgraded the product to make it a little bit easier to use, but compared to some of the other platforms, it is not easy to configure it, set it up, and get it running. However, once you have set it up and got it running, it runs great.

Once it was set up and running, there were no issues with it. It seems to run fairly well.

It is scalable. I was the admin for this system, and we probably had over a thousand end-users. I was the only one who knew how to use it at the time.

Their tech support was pretty good. For any issues we had, they'd come in and work with us and get them resolved pretty quickly.

Its setup isn't very intuitive.

We had perpetual licenses. The cost was around 36,000, and then you'd have the yearly maintenance fee of 2,000 or 3,000.

They have a service where they come in and configure it or do the setup for you for a price. I don't remember the price, but it was pretty reasonable. If you're not familiar with the platform, that might be a good thing to go with, especially if you don't want to go in and do the ifs and buts trying to set it up. It would be a lot easier if you had them come and set it up for you. With all the alerting and everything else that you have to set up with it, it takes a minute to get it up and running and have everything the way you wanted.

I'd give it an eight out of 10. I was really happy with it.

We use the product for endpoint security.

They provide good services.

The product's remote access manager needs improvement. The wake-up takes longer time, sometimes more than five minutes. It could respond immediately.

I have been using ManageEngine Endpoint Central for one or two months. At present, I use the latest version.

I rate the platform's stability a seven out of ten.

We have approximately 2000 ManageEngine Endpoint Central users in our organization. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten.

The initial setup process is good. It requires a technical team of seven to ten engineers for deployment and takes an hour or two to complete. Later, we need to maintain the product as well.

The product is not expensive. I rate its pricing a seven out of ten.

I rate ManageEngine Endpoint Central a seven out of ten. We encounter issues related to the quality of services.

We use this product for:

• User management and Patch management.
• Application and software deployment management, which is made very easy using its software.
• Remote support on different platforms like macOS, Windows, Linux, and tablets (Android and iOS).
• Software usage monitoring by the users.
• Providing endpoint security and assets management.
• Discovering the software license and warranty details. 
• Device control like USB and security policies.
• Effectively applying restrictions on end-user devices like cameras and browsers.

Having one single portal for all of our patch management, application management, mobile device management, and remote support has greatly improved our IT capabilities. Previously, we were using different tools for each different purpose.

The endpoint security helps us control the user device as per the IT policies. 

OS deployment and software deployment have saved the IT department a large amount of time during the mass onboarding.

Using desktop central has increased the efficiency of the asset management in our company. 

The most important feature we found to be useful in the COVID situation is the secure connection, which gives the IT support staff the ability to seamlessly connect with the users remotely and in a secure way. They can connect to almost all of the operating systems including Windows, Linux, macOS, and tablets. This also gives great control to the IT support staff, who remotely connect to the users during emergencies.

The patch management of the different operating systems in our environment is also made easy by using the desktop central software. 

There is a slight delay in customer support, which is something that can be improved.

We would like to see more integration on the macOS side, much as it is with Windows. There are still some access-level restrictions that we can see in the latest macOS when we connect desktop central remote. This is something that should be improved in the next release.

We have been using ManageEngine Desktop Central for two and a half years.

It is quite a stable product and we have access to customer support if there are any issues. Make sure that you subscribe to an annual support contract.

It's pretty good at scaling up. You just need to buy a license and it's ready to use.

The technical support is good but sometimes, there is a slight delay in response. 

We did not use another similar product before this one.

The setup was a bit complex initially but with use, we have become experts now.

Our implementation was done through a vendor.

We have been using this product for the past two and a half years and we have seen a 90% ROI. 

It's relatively cheap if you take the overall product. Choose wisely between the Professional and Enterprise editions, based on your needs.

We evaluated TeamViewer for remote support, as well as Microsoft System Center.

Overall, given the capabilities of Desktop Central, it is one of the best endpoint management solutions and it can cater to most of the operating systems in a client's environment, through a single portal.

We have about 180 endpoints that are spread across several buildings. We have an Active Directory environment. It is hard to maintain updates, install software, and do support in such an environment. Desktop Central has given tools to maintain our environment with ease, deploy updates to machines. Deploy software is an easy to use tool for our needs. The tool for remote support is so great with the ability to use shortcuts and chat. Also, we use an asset scan option very much to maintain an overview of our environment.

Since deploying Desktop Central our endpoints are all updated. We use configuration management to deploy shortcuts to our users' desktops with ease. Also, we use configuration management to map logical hard drives to our users. Our users are very happy with how much ease IT can solve their problems. Also, we have an overview of our complete IT environment and assets so we can upgrade our endpoints as needed. And we are an overall much secure IT environment since we deployed Desktop Central because all our endpoints are up to date.

Patch management is an excellent tool because we deploy patches with ease and also decline patches. Asset management and scan are also very useful because we have an overview of all our endpoints and their configurations. Remote connections to endpoints for support is great with chat, shortcuts to tools, and user keyboard locking. Also, notifications, if someone tries to remove any hardware from the endpoint, is working very well. We have somewhat used reporting options but it works very well and we will surely use it in the future.

We would like to see options for deploying Microsoft 365 accounts into Outlook. For now, we only can use it to deploy exchange accounts. Also, we would like to see an option do decline Windows 7 ESU patches in a bulk. For now, we have to decline them one by one which is not an easy process. Also, we are not clear about uninstalling Desktop Central patches from our server. That is not a problem for now but in the future, it could be. There should be some more clearance on how to uninstall Desktop Central patches and what are the consequences.

We have been using it for six months.

Great stability.

There are a lot of scenarios for scalability but we have not tried it yet. ManageEngine has a lot of products that can be integrated with DesktopCentral, like Service Desk Plus and Browser Security plus but we have not tried it yet.

Had no need for customer service or technical support.

We did not use a different solution.

It is very easy to setup and tutorials and online support are great.

We deployed it in-house.

The licensing is very easy to understand and pricing is right for what you get.

We didn't.

Our primary use for Manage Engine started off with just using Service Desk Plus to manage our internal issues.  Since started with just Service Desk Plus, we have moved on to utilizing Asset Management, MDM, and my favorite, the OS Deployment.  Another great part of Desktop Central is the Patch Management to deploy software and windows updates on our time and not Microsoft Windows. We have also utilized the Patch Management to deploy updates to external software such as Zoom, Snagit, Microsoft Teams, and many others. 

ManageEngine Desktop Central has greatly improved our organization by utilizing Service Desk Plus to monitor and keep track of issues that our end users report to our Help Desk Department. We also have written in the ode of our company's software to notify Support if an end-user experience an issue and does not report it. That way we can improve our software and be a more robust organization. Also using the Asset Management gives us a way to see what equipment users have and when they need to be upgraded and or replaced. 

Although there are many great features within Desktop Central, my most favorite has to be the OS Deployment. When we order new computers in large batches, having the OS Deployment makes the process much, much easier to get them prepared for our users. We also utilize the Self Service Portal to push out applications and give the end-users the option to install the application if they want it and it can be installed without Administrative privileges which takes less time from the Help Desk or System Administrators.  

Not many things are needed for improvement, everything seems to be great as it is. One thing that would be good to have would be the ability to add MDM to a tablet running Android 5.0 using the EMM Token Enrollment.  If we wanted to add MDM to an older tablet, we just have to go the "long route" to get it added. I would guess another option would be a lower price cap for using all the separate divisions of programs that are being built withing Desktop Central.  We actually opted out of renewing Analytics Plus this last go around because of the cost and the lack of times we actually used it to run reports. 

We have been utilizing Manage Engine Desktop Central for approximately 2-3 years. 

The stability and performance of Desktop Central have been great. We have no issues, but we also use the on-prem option.

Desktop Central is deferentially very scalable.  They are always coming up with new options very often.  

Every time we have had to contact the customer support to assist with an issue or an answer, they have always been very knowledgeable and very helpful. They continue to follow-up after the issue has been resolved to ensure everything is going well and if there was anything else they would be able to assist with.   

Before we moved over to Desktop Plus, we were using Spice Works, mainly because they were free. They had several applications that are similar to Desktop Central, but they were just not the same.  It was a great investigation to make the switch to Desktop Central. 

The setup was fairly simple. We had no issues and were able to get everything up and running within 48 hours.  

Not with a vendor team, but with our talented staff of System Administrators who were able to read and study the verbiage of the documentation. 

It's hard to say what our ROI is because I do not work in the finance department. I can say that the happier we can make the executives and salespeople happy with their equipment their operation, they are able to produce more income for the company.

I would advise others to think about using Desktop Desktop for all their network, tickets, and assets needs. I personally have not used the network monitoring software, but it's like any of the other portions of Desktop Central, it must be good. 

No, there were no other applications we tried.

Some times, when adding new programs to Desktop Central, it can be somewhat costly. I say be prepared to be able to spend some money. We asked to pay for several years at a time to lower the long term cost.