ManageEngine Endpoint Central Reviews

We use this solution for Patch Management, IT Asset Management, and Remote Control on Network Computers.

We adopted this solution by replacing GFI LanGuard.

Current version of Endpoint central has great capabilities over patch management and software deployment. Also we can take advantages of many system tools and configurations for day to day work.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the Patch Management.

The Patch Management functionality needs still improvements. No provision to control network traffic. 

The Deployment scheduler needs updating to support various methods for deployment.

We have used this solution from 2012 onward.

Solution is very stable and has great featurs that can be used by system admins.

The product has great capabilitied only the should understand the patching process more deeply to avoid failures and client system issues such as OS corrupt, continuos patch failed, system hanging etc.

Support needs improvement. They totally realy on customers at present.

Neutral

GFI LanGuard has poor capicity and feature for patch deployment. We find many client computer OS getting corrupt due to improper patch deployment.

It take a while to understand the process for us.

We implemented in-house.

Manage Engine Licensing policy is best among all. You should always take 10% less licenses than projected. I will advise to learn and implement the solution in-house rather than buying initial setup service.

GFI LanGuard

You can limit the admins and users for the Endpoint Management to reduce the cost.

I like that we can manage everything totally in one dashboard. We can install software easily. Anyone can handle the installation. It's got good documentation. 

The setup is pretty simple. 

It's scalable. 

The technical communication needs to be better. They need better technical support.

The solution is expensive. 

I've been using the solution for one to two months. 

The product is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. I'd rate the stability eight or nine out of ten based on its reliability.

It is scalable. It is simple to expand. I'd rate its ability to scale eight out of ten. 

Technical support has not been great. I haven't been pleased with their ability to assist when we need help. That said, there are some technicians that are good if you can get a hold of them.

Negative

It is easy to set up the solution. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. It is not overly complex. 

It is a pretty expensive solution. With one being cheap and ten being expensive, I'd rate the affordability at a nine out of ten. Compared to other products, it costs a lot. 

I'm a customer and end user. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I'm pretty happy with its capabilities. 

The solution is implemented in a medium-sized company. We're working with the enterprise edition.

The solution is deployed on-premises and on the cloud.

The patch manager is good and it's easy to use. There's a good learning curve. It's easy to deploy and can be implemented in a short amount of time.

The MDM feature isn't very good. It doesn't support Amazon vendors.

I have used this solution for seven years.

It's stable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is very good.

Compared with VMware Workspace, ManageEngine Desktop Central is a better product.

It's easy to set up.

I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10. 

It's stable and there are no bugs. It's a very good solution. 

Windows patching and inventory management are the most valuable features

ManageEngine Desktop Central is very limited. When you scan your system, it will only recognize Microsoft Windows Defender and BitLocker. The warranty period, on Desktop Central only recognizes the Dell. They do not recognize HP and they do not recognize any other brand like ThinkPad.

I have been using ManageEngineDesktop Central for eleven years.

ManageEngine Desktop Central is stable.

We maintain ourselves, but if there is something beyond our knowledge, then we contact technical support.

Neutral

I have used Spiceworks.

I would rate pricing as a seven on a scale of one to ten. ManageEngine Desktop Central could be cheaper.

Seven hundred users are currently using the system.

I would rate ManageEngine Desktop Central an eight on a scale of one to ten.

We don't yet use it in our office. It is for our customers. We have implemented it for a few banking customers in the middle east, and we are now waiting to also use it for our internal purposes.

In terms of technical capability, it is doing very well. It is doing better than other industry products. It is at a place where we can compare it with Microsoft products. Its scalability is also good.

Its licensing should be improved.

I have been using it for almost two years.

It is stable.

It is scalable by nature. It supports two models: on-premises and SaaS.

I would advise any organization that wants to implement Manage Engine to pick the right components of Manage Engine during the design stage itself, such as Patch Manager or Mobile Desk Manager, and then go ahead with the implementation. 

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

We are in the testing phase of ManageEngine Desktop Central. 

ManageEngine Desktop Central's most valuable features are remote desktop control and image management. We can send things out from the desk here, it is a very good tool for us.

The reporting analytics could improve in ManageEngine Desktop Central. However, there are some third-party add-ins or modules you can purchase to do reporting analytics.

I have used ManageEngine Desktop Central within the last 12 months.

We have had sales support from ManageEngine Desktop Central and they have been very helpful.

The initial setup is straightforward. My manager is in the process and there have not been any problems.

ManageEngine Desktop Central should not require a lot of maintenance that we have seen in the short time of our usage.

I rate ManageEngine Desktop Central a nine out of ten.

My main use case of Desktop Central is for patch management, software deployment, and inventory.

Desktop Central has solved multiple problems for us, including providing patch management so we can get ISO 27001 certification. It also means that we can deploy to all of our machines at once.

The most valuable features of Desktop Central are patch management and deployment.

I would like for the next release to be available as SaaS.

I have been working with this solution for three years.

Desktop Central is stable.

This solution is easy to scale.

My experience with technical support has been good.

The initial setup was generally straightforward and easy, though there can be difficulties if your organization has offices in multiple locations. On average, deployment takes around fifteen to twenty days.

Desktop Central is affordable for any customer.

Desktop Central is a very good, functional solution for endpoint management. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We are using the solution for desktop support. You can connect to the client machines and do the support for them remotely. You can record the sessions and you can deploy software. We use it to install operating systems. It's basically a desktop support solution.

The product makes it very easy to connect to clients. Normally, with all the tools I try, many have been messy when connecting with the client. With DesktopCentral, it's really easy. 

Normally, you can install the software and you are ready to run when you install the agent in the client. It's very easy to install on the clients' machines as you can connect with the active directory and deploy it automatically.

The initial setup is very simple.

The stability is very good.

The product tends to have some glitches in terms of connection when you have two connections to the same machine. For example, you have the internet cable connected to your PC, and you are connected to the WiFi. The client gets confused about that and loses the connection with the client a lot of the time if you don't deactivate one of them.

They should make it easier to deploy in the clients. 

Improvement of the chats on the web communication through the WAN would be helpful.

I've used the solution at this company for two years. In my last job, maybe I use it for four years approximately.

The product is very stable. Normally, I do the updates. I never have a problem or have to make a solution for coming back after a shutdown. It's reliable. there are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's my understanding that the scalability is good. I don't have a cluster right now, however, from what I see, it's going to be easy to set up. In the option of the platform, you have an assistant to make a cluster and make your implementation bigger. That said, I didn't try it yet.

I have five technical users and I have 200 clients.

I don't have plans to have more clients or increase usage as the size of the company is finite. However, I will likely acquire more products from ManageEngine.

The initial implementation process was very simple. I even installed it myself. 

I didn't need support or a consultant to do the setup. I handled it myself and was very, very simple.

We pay licensing fees on a yearly basis. 

We have the aggregate fees for a few things, however, for the most part, it's all under one license fee. There aren't added costs.

We are partners. 

The advice I can give to people looking to implement this solution is to read all the information they have on the website as all the steps to handle the implementation is there. It is very easy to read and it's very accessible on their site. You don't need to look for other site guides or any other tutorials as everything you need is right there on their website.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been pretty happy with the product in general.