Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

The main use case for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is in the area of desktop management, such as hardware inventory, software, and deployment management.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is valuable in keeping our systems updated. We are able to send updates to all the systems. Additionally, the Intune integration is helpful.

The time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved. 

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately 10 years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is great. We are able to extend the solution to multiple site locations.

Typically, we would contact Microsoft for technical support only if the issue at hand is beyond our expertise, as we try to resolve it as much as possible on our own. For more complex technical problems, we would submit a support ticket through Microsoft's email support system to receive advanced assistance. They have provided us with timely support when we needed it.

I previously used ManageEngine and a few others before the use of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager.

The main difference is the price and packages of the solutions. Some of them come as a complete package with VMware software as part of their offering. Depending on the customer's use case one solution might be better than the other. 

One area that stands out regarding Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager over the rest is its reliability.

The initial setup for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is simple. However, the configuration and management are not simple.

Most of my clients are using the on-premise configuration. Cloud deployment is cumbersome because It requires lots of system communication to open from the cloud, and every client has to communicate with the cloud.

We follow the Microsoft best practices procedure and white papers for implementation. Which includes single and multiple server deployments.

The time it takes for deployment depends on the client's environment, such as the configuration and customization needed. However, the process can typically take two to three weeks to complete.

We use two to three engineers for the deployment of the solution.

The solution can be managed by one engineer. The person involved has to have some knowledge, and they need to be dedicated to the task. Not anyone can do it. It is ideal to have a team for the task.

The solution is helpful for IT teams.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We use Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for application deployment and patching. We run the gamut, and we use it for quite a bit.

To do what we are doing with the configurations manager manually would be impossible. We have over 100,000 systems, and it simplifies a lot of what we are doing. The reporting aspect allows you to report on patch compliance, etc. It just simplifies a lot of things.

I like a lot of the reporting capabilities and baseline configurations.

Some of the capabilities aren't fully developed yet. It's an ongoing work in progress. I think they are making some steps in the right direction as far as managing workstations centrally, like Intune. 

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for over ten years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is stable.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give stability a nine. 

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is very scalable. We probably have 150,000 users right now.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give scalability a nine.

The initial setup is a bit challenging. We have a relatively complex environment. It's a little bit more complicated than it might be for a smaller environment. It can be relatively straightforward, but there are some twists in our environment.

We implemented this solution.

I would tell potential users that it's a worthwhile solution for any company that has to manage a lot of systems. It's a great tool.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight.

We were replacing SCCM. It's been easy enough to do in terms of getting the devices and seeing what's being discovered from that type of info. We're looking for hardware and software data coming across. 

The solution is helping us by bringing the hardware details on it, and it's a software install. That way, we can account for the devices and identify and understand what is actually installed do the computers. 

It's very easy to use and understand. 

The solution is affordable.

It is stable and reliable. 

We've found scalability to be good.

Technical support was helpful and responsive.

The setup is simple and pretty standard. 

We'd like additional data related to security and the configurations of the hardware. 

On some hardware, we'd like an easier way to get peripherals attached. 

I've been using the solution for about six months. I haven't used it for that long. 

It is stable. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution can scale well. We weren't surprised about anything. It does what needs to be done. 

Technical support is excellent. When we had a question, we got prompt answers. We are quite satisfied with the level of support. 

Positive

The initial setup was pretty standard. It was not complex. 

We have witnessed an ROI.

The pricing is good. I'd rate its affordability eight out of ten. It could always be cheaper, however, we are pretty happy with the cost.

We are not on the latest version. However, we're getting to upgrade the product.

You need to understand what type of data you need and what it can pull. That's part of the configuration that needs to be done at the outset. If you know what you want and you make sure the system can do it, and it's configured right, and you'll be happy.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use MECM for intelligent logic automation. About 400,000 users are impacted by the solution, but there are around 20 admins who work with it directly. We have multiple automation tools and use the one that makes sense as needed.

We're designing PowerShell scripts to automate patching the boot process. The ROI is there.

I like the data collection. 

The reports are too busy. They could be simpler. I'm a technician, so I don't care how pretty the reports look. They should be easy to read. I'm designing this for production folks. They need to read the reports quickly when they're patching in the middle of the night.

I have used MECM for about four or five months.

I rate MECM nine out of 10 for stability. 

I rate MECM eight out of 10 for scalability.

I haven't gotten support from Microsoft for MECM, but I've contacted them in the past for various tickets. They're professional.

I work in the lab. I design a solution before it's deployed in production. I wasn't involved in the actual deployment. Deploying things in the lab is different. It's a much smaller footprint.

So far, the ROI is pretty decent.

MECM is more expensive than Ansible, which is open and free. That's why we'll use other tools as needed for automation. 

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager seven out of 10. You need to have the right mindset to use it. The first question should always be: Can this be automated? From there, you'll see if the product will satisfy their automation requirements.

We use the solution for remote control, patch management, and software deployment. 

The tool's most valuable features include security updates and patch management, which are critical functions for maintaining security. The automated software distribution and the ability to manage deployments are also highly useful. Enforcing compliance with set policies on systems is another key functionality we leverage.

The solution should incorporate AI. It should also incorporate real-time capabilities. If we could get real-time information about challenges or issues, it would allow us to take immediate action. For example, with the recent outage caused by the Windows issue, having a real-time warning system could have helped us avoid or reduce the downtime we experienced.

I have been working with the product for eight to ten years. 

I rate Microsoft Configuration Manager's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate the solution's scalability an eight out of ten.

As a main competitor to Microsoft Configuration Manager, I've used Ansible quite extensively as an alternative. There are also other products like those from Ivanti or Jamf. From an automation standpoint, we've tried Ansible and Chef as competitors. However, doing a direct function-by-function comparison is difficult since they all have different capabilities.

Our team is highly skilled, so it seems fairly straightforward from my perspective. However, the difficulty likely depends on skill levels.

The solution is expensive. Microsoft Configuration Manager would likely be considered high-priced for small businesses because they may not fully utilize all of its features and capabilities.

The solution is mostly for enterprises. Smaller businesses can opt for Microsoft Intune or other third-party products. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

I am using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for patch management and asset inventory.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's incredibly simple to configure and execute changes in bulk, allowing for seamless deployment. With this solution, you can easily track the status of all modifications and send them with ease, making it a comprehensive and efficient solution for any necessary adjustments.

The assets have reached their end-of-life, and patching them is a complex and laborious task. It would be highly advantageous if there were an integrated solution that provided distinct options for each end-of-life asset, streamlining the process and facilitating comprehension.

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately one and a half years.

I rate the stability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We have approximately 10,000 users using the solution.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a ten out of ten.

I use Tanium in parallel with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. Tanium is a similar solution that has features, such as asset patching, and encryption, and can be configured around Microsoft assets.

The initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is simple.

There is an annual license needed to use the solution.

This tool is helpful for Microsoft assets but it is important to have clear visibility before implementation. It can be a complete solution but a plan.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We use this solution to apply new group policies.

The solution was particularly helpful for patching the OS, and for the VM in our environment. With 10 branches, we have a huge number of VMs. Using ECM, we can download the new patches one by one, apply and then restore them. It saves us a lot of time. 

The valuable feature is the ability to gain all the data you need. We can collect data and get insight into the functionalities of their scope. As system administrators, we get a summarized report for each site with the installed version of the OS for all PCs in our environment. We know which meet the requirements and which don't. For those that don't, we can mitigate any potential vulnerabilities or threats.

I think managing Linux devices could be improved. It would help our colleagues and other departments like the dev opps, who only use Linux machines to quickly patch their VMs.

I've been using this solution for two years. 

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

The technical support could be improved. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. We have six users. 

It's important to keep the database going at all times to avoid any interruption of the service. The implementation must be very well designed because you have to know the scope of your workload and that should be addressed in the action plan before proceeding with the deployment. 

I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

We use it to manage our enterprise desktops and laptops. Most of our enterprise computers are managed using this platform, but we also include some mobile devices. It allows us to manage our desktops effectively with policies in place. I estimate that over 50% of our laptops are managed using this platform.

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.

Microsoft Endpoint Manager has incompatibility issues with some Linux versions and most of our programmers are using Linux operating systems. This creates a challenge for administrators in terms of managing the Linux operating system. For example, Fedora and Kali Linux are two of the most popular Linux distributions among developers, and so policies need to be fine-tuned to work properly on these systems. The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux. 

I have been using Endpoint Manager for two years.

The stability is good.

The solution is highly scalable.

The technical support is awesome.

Positive

Before switching to Microsoft Endpoint Manager we used a trial version of ManageEngine, but it was very costly compared to Microsoft Endpoint Manager. We switched because we already had the Microsoft Developer ecosystem in our environment, and we got it at a really low cost being a bundled product. Manage Engine is a worldwide solution that specializes in endpoint management. It is on the same level as Microsoft, but Microsoft has an upper hand in terms of budget.

The initial setup is straightforward. We had a team of three people that configured and deployed Microsoft Endpoint Manager. 

We deploy this software in our endpoint computers, most of the staff computers and laptops, as well as 50% of the staff laptops that are signed out. We are also trying it on some mobile devices to see the results before rolling it out to all mobile devices. 

The implementation was completed in-house.

We have seen a great return on investment using the solution through time saved. Most of our enterprise computers are equipped with advanced features and internet access is for the most part open. To increase the working throughput of staff and employees, we use endpoint managers with reduced fees and separate policies to ensure they only have access to useful applications during working hours. This has actually increased productivity in terms of time saved.

Microsoft Endpoint Manager also provides a return on investment by helping us save money. For example, if we want to deploy other solutions, we would have to subscribe to them. And some of those solutions are hardware-oriented, while others are software-oriented. By using Microsoft Endpoint Manager, we can save money by purchasing these solutions together.

Microsoft provides a steep price for their enterprise products, but they offer very competitive pricing for their legacy customers. We have been using Microsoft products for the past six to seven years and have found that the cost is considerably less than if we were to purchase a single product. For example,  ManageEngine is passed on to us at an individual price, which makes the overall cost much higher.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Maintenance is required for some client requests because a few of our cases involve clients reporting issues with their applications. We need to maintain their laptops because they usually run into issues while running other applications. However, in the case of personal computers, there is no problem. We can maintain them with only 20% of the typical maintenance requirements.

I would recommend that everyone try out the Endpoint Manager solution from Microsoft. It is a great product because it integrates well with Microsoft products, which most organizations use. This reduces the number of integration and troubleshooting problems. Even if Microsoft products are not used in an organization, I still recommend this product. Other solutions are available but there may be some integration and troubleshooting problems.