What is our primary use case?
The primary use case for SCCM is for managing workstations.
All of the software that runs on our workstations is packaged and distributed and managed. Along with that, some of our security software is managed a little bit differently, but is accounted for in that way.
We also use it for keeping track of our patches.
What is most valuable?
We're a Microsoft-centric organization, so we are happy with the integration between products.
The interface, customization, and security are all pretty good.
What needs improvement?
There is no asset management package included. You have to buy that separately so we need to use another system to manage that. This is one of the biggest things that makes SCCM not as competitive as some other systems. If they had this functionality then their help desk software would be much better and much more useful.
It is a little bit fat on the client-side, in terms of the stuff it leaves in place after the management is complete. It would be nice if they could pay attention to that, although we have a separate way of dealing with it.
For how long have I used the solution?
I have been involved with using SCCM in four or five different places for a total of close to 15 years.
What do I think about the stability of the solution?
SCCM has no issue with stability.
What do I think about the scalability of the solution?
This is a scalable product. The biggest group that I have been involved with was maybe 15,000 people. Typically, the sizes are in the 1,000-person area and it's not the type of product that you put together and configure for an office.
How are customer service and support?
Their SCCM support is slightly better than their general support. Their general support, Microsoft is tiered so you have to fight your way through the tiers to get to the real people. There's no way around that, but that's just the way they are. I understand that because they're such a big company
How was the initial setup?
I have not done the initial setup alone, and I wouldn't recommend doing it for anybody who didn't know what they were doing, or that hadn't done it before, because you have to go through a certain learning process.
I have seen that a base installation complete can be done in three days, and I have also seen an environment with 1,000 workstations deployed in two weeks.
What about the implementation team?
I have always worked with somebody who is well-versed in the solution to assist with deployment. I rely on a Microsoft MVP-level person to get the install done properly for me.
One person is enough for maintenance.
What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?
Pricing is negotiable with Microsoft, depending upon which of their packages you choose. They're changing their packages, and I don't know how they're changing them yet. It's been a few years since I have worked in that capacity.
Which other solutions did I evaluate?
We continually look at and evaluate everything.
Microsoft has Intune, as well. However, Intune is a choice if you're in a smaller-scale situation. Typically, I don't get called into things unless it is large, where I interact with clients on technical computing and solving network problems that are related to workstation issues. For these types of larger things, SCCM is a logical choice.
I haven't been in a Unix environment beyond having to do database-engine-related work.
What other advice do I have?
My advice for anybody looking into implementing SCCM is that it has to be on a larger scale, and you have to be committed to Microsoft.
I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Which deployment model are you using for this solution?
On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.