Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is patch management.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager can improve by allowing us to schedule the scripts, we don't have a script scheduling option and have to do it manually. 

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for a couple of years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is a stable solution.

The scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is good.

The support can be responsive but other times can be a little slow.

The rate support from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

I have not used another solution other than Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager.

The initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager was simple.

We did the deployment of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager in-house. We have our maintenance of the solution automated.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is a complete solution for what we need it for, and I would recommend it to others.

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

The product is quite good. We are happy with the collaboration of SCCM with Patch My PC, which allows us to do patchwork.

While the solution is quite good, it can be difficult to understand the logic of this product when it comes to software inventory.

Upon examination of the on-premise and Azure environments, I feel that SCCM could be more flexible.

While the issue of documentation is not exclusive to SCCM, it can be improved. When it comes to Microsoft Office suite, it is not always clear to where the articles have been moved and the use of a built-in searching giant to find their whereabouts is not always a possibility. When the article is moved to a new location, it can make it challenging to find what I deem to be useful or interesting. 

I believe we started using SCCM in 2003.

Microsoft technical support used to be better. In spite of us being a premier customer, we find the support unsatisfactory. The qualifications are not at issue, but the excessive time it takes for them to react, investigate and provide us with answers is.

When it comes to technical support, it is a crapshoot. I know how Microsoft works from the inside, as we used to work for the company. There are times when we will speak with a person who is really qualified and interested in helping and the case can be closed in the course of a single remote session or call.

At other times the ticket is apparently not rotated to the right person. In such cases, we will encounter someone who is merely being polite, towards the end of keeping the customer engaged but without the ability to help. 

Pricing is not in my work description and is left up to management and my colleagues. 

Since I cannot think of anything in need of improvement concerning SCCM, I would rate it as a ten out of ten.

We have just implemented a patch management solution. We are using SCCM for the server. For the client or endpoint, we are using a different product called Ivanti.

It is a very good solution. It has a good interface and is easy to use. On top of that, it is very reliable in terms of distribution as well as getting the report.

Its client interface should be more accessible, and the notifications should be more customizable from the console. It should be more user friendly and have some kind of customized notifications so that we can use it on the client side. These are the reasons why we restricted its use only for the server environment and didn't use it on the client side.

I cannot say anything about its scalability at this time. We are still exploring this solution. We are using SCCM for the server, so only IT people use it or log into it. In terms of nodes, about 500 nodes are using the product effectively.

I have not been in touch with Microsoft in terms of support for this solution. We are good. We do have people who get support from Microsoft for any issues, but I don't remember facing any issues recently on the SCCM front. We did have a call with Microsoft because SCCM was not supporting some applications on the patch upgrade front, and we wanted to explore and know future trends. 

It is easy.

We are still exploring this solution, and we haven't yet explored all the features.

I would rate SCCM an eight out of ten. It just needs a better user interface and some kind of customizations because currently, they are very limited.

Our main use is, first of all, to update the patches and to push the patches from SCCM, to check systems software, and to see which software is installed along with the systems. These are the major three things that we use on SCCM. 

We are on the endpoint side. We just ensure that the SCCM agent is installed appropriately. 

I have an on-site server also. There are the primary servers, and then there are site servers of SCCM. I have a site server also. With the site server, I have to make sure it is working and there is no hardware level or any other issue on these machines. This site server is replicating with the main servers in our data center. 

Due to the fact that we have different sites in different locations including the UAE, Oman, and other sites, there are other site servers, that are replicating with the main servers. They may be taking other information from SCCM as well.

The main, clear valuable feature is updating the latest patches, Software distribution, remote control and computer inventory. This is the main feature we really utilize a lot.

The main SCCM lacks some things, which they incorporated into Microsoft Intune. When I evaluated these two products, one from VMware Workspace One and one from Microsoft, I found that there is something missing in SCCM, which is available and works very well in VMware Workspace One. SCCM should work to add these features into their service offering.

For example, devices like smartphones and tablets are managed very well on VMware Workspace One, however, they are absent in SCCM. I could configure the iPad from the VMware Workspace One cloud and it was done very easily. It should be just as possible on SCCM.

I've been using the solution for three to four years.

It's constantly running alongside computers. When they are on, SCCM is on. It's a stable product. There aren't issues with it crashing or getting glitchy. There is no issue, we have not faced any issue with SCCM.

Everyone in our organization uses SCCM, as it's on all of the device endpoints. There are two to three people that have access to the SCCM  servers. 

The scalability is very easy. If a company needs to expand it to more endpoints they can do so easily.

Initially, when we were installing the agent originally, we did run into a few issues. We found SCCM was not installed on a few computers or servers during installation. We had to get some help to deal with those problems and getting SCCM installed correctly. We figured out the requirements. Now it's working fine. 

That was just initially. We do not spend a lot of time with SCCM now. Whenever we have a new computer connect with our networks, within two minutes it starts working. There are no more issues. Therefore, since implementation, we haven't really had to call them.

We were not previously using any other solution. SCCM was our first.

I did the configuration of SCCM from scratch, however, I did not configure the VMware Workspace One as it was installed on cloud. I basically just did it for an evaluation to have a taste of VMware Workspace One.

Therefore, I don't know about the level of complexity or if it's easy or it's difficult in VMware Workspace One. In SCCM, however, there were some issues which I had to search and get assistance with and there were some issues that I resolved. I would describe it as somewhat complex. It was not so simple that anyone can do it.

For me took me three to four days to configure it and set it up in perfect working condition. That was mostly due to the fact that I took some time to research the issues I came into contact with.

The main production server is in our data center in Pakistan and production site server in Qatar and UAE, and their configuration is performed by a team in corporate office in Pakistan

I'm more interested in features, which is where I spend most of my research time with products. I don't really get into pricing. I'm not sure of the exact price. I can't say if it's cheaper or more expensive than other options.

I've considered evaluating VMware WorkspaceOne, however, their product is limited when users are just trying them out.

We are at an endpoint site. The servers that are in our data center.  I don't know which exact service-side version we are using at our data center.

I would recommend SCCM to others. I've used it from scratch and with the new features, especially Intune. I do recommend the SCCM, especially in the Microsoft environment.  VMware Workspace One is also good, from what I understand. The issue is they give very limited trial features. If they would give I full fledged trial base version of the VMware Workspace One, it would be easier for someone to completely evaluate the two. Microsoft gives you a six month evaluation period, for example. That's a lot of time to get to know the system. 

SCCM, therefore, is the best that I can tell, as I've been able to evaluate it fully. Overall, I would rate it eight out of ten.

Our Windows environment has about 100 servers, Windows 2012/2016, and more than 500 desktop and laptop computers with Windows 7/10.

We use SCCM 2012 mainly for installing and deployment of images for new operating systems on end-user computers, for application management, distribution of new applications, software and hardware inventory, remote assistance, application virtualization and, of course, for software updates on servers and workstations.

It has improved distribution and the migration of existing desktop computers and user profiles to new machines.

Excellent reports for compliance, status of updates, and software metering.

I would like to see some improvements in WSUS and control of other, non-Microsoft, product updates.

The best features that I really appreciated are software and application pushing, Microsoft patching with Wsus integration, O.S. deployment with PXE (with driver installation, latest patches and customization), mobile management with Intune Connector, file inventory on pcs, users statistic usage about applications, hardware and software inventory.

We had the opportunity to easily manage Microsoft patching deployment with Wsus role installed or maintaining Wsus infrastructure separated from SCCM.

In this latter case we created properly GPO and script to push patch centrally and with appropriate scheduling. At the same time mobile management with MDM ability and encrypting as well, software and application pushing and updating overriding security concerns and O.S. deployment was some of the top features that we really appreciated.
I appreciated Distribution points on the cloud and ability to publish on demandapplications for users groups.

In this case users could choose from software list to automatically install some missing application without asking directly to IT team.

I think that some improvements would be appreciated on application package deployment for whom that has not a deep scripting ability like me.

SCCM is an high CPU/memory conuming application and so it would be fine that Microsoft could improve performances.

I started utilizing SMS 2003 since 9 years ago, since 4 years ago I managed and directed differentsmigration projects and zero installations on corporate companies with CAS, Primary and Secondary Sites.

At the same time I utilized this product during daily operations like reporting, software pushing, Microsoft patching, mobile managemen with satisfaction

You should consider that this product is particularly complex and delicate at the same time and so, the most difficult thing, was related to find causes of any installation delay or misconfiguration

About stability I did not find any particular problem.

When I got some problems on internet is quite easy to find consistent answers.

The only thing that I did not appreciated it was the case that, if you do not have CAS, you can install only one primary sites and all other sites could be only secondary sites.

This problem could be solved installing CAS later but about secondary site upgrade I am not aware that they can be automatically updated to primary site without uninstallation and re-installation.

Customer service is very good.

Technical support is very good and there are a lot of documentation on internet to help you on deployment/usage too.

I utilized for a while PDQ, spiceworks and psexec too but they are not caomparable with wide SCCM options/features.

The first setup was quite complex but primarily due to wide capabilities of the product itself that need time to be customized.

It was implemented by an in-house team coordinated and managed from me.

In my opinion SCCM SP1 is great.

Setup and licensing was quite expensive as well at start up stage. When all procedures have been implemented like collections, application and packages, wsus automatically deployment, O.S preparation, mobile management policies, reporting day by day, time to be spent to manage it would be more limited but, considering the importance and quantity of activity done from SCCM it would be normal to have a lot of hours daily spent from a team to utilize this product (obviously it would depends on company too)

PDQ, Spiceworks, psexec, GPO, scripting…

SCCM is really great but you must consider that you will take a lot of time to manage it entirely.

You should consider that this product would be, in the future, more and more strategic for companies about security concerns, task automation and for your CV too.

I have a lot of guide and screenshot as well:

http://www.alessandromazzanti.com/search/label/SCCM%202012

Here is my blog link:

http://www.alessandromazzanti.com/

https://www.linkedin.com/in/mazzanti

We use it and our clients use it for device patch management, servers, and management processes.

We deploy it for clients but we don't usually maintain it for them.

The best thing about SCCM is the patch management. You can make sure that all of your devices are there. You can see all of them and see your levels.

It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in.

SCCM internally works great. On your internal infrastructure, it is fantastic. It gives you everything you want it to do.

Because of the way SCCM is, we are moving to the Intune platform similarly to the way that everybody else is. Microsoft is slowly migrating SCCM to the new Intune product for management.

There are so many issues with SCCM, but they are already working on migrating the desktop to the intune platform. They have already improved the management and the patch management. They are also looking at cloud integration and being able to deploy it in Azure properly and run the Azure infrastructure.

The main or legacy issue is not being able to do remote management of devices without being on a VPN to get their updates. It didn't work well on non-corporate networks. This has been resolved by the new Intune platform.

It's Microsoft, they have their issues, but they are getting better. They are integrating it with their office products, and their platforms.

In the next releases, I would like to see them make it easier to do remote sessions into the boxes.

It would be nice to have everything in one place. Now they have Intune for the desktops and SCCM to handle their servers.

I have been using SCCM for ten years.

We were using some of the older versions.

The stability is only as good as your infrastructure.

The scalability of SCCM is good but now that it is on the intune platform, it's even better.

The usage and how extensively it is being used depends on the client and the client's roadmap.

As gold partners, you have a direct line to Microsoft technical staff. It is easy for us to get support.

Our experience with the support is a positive one.

I have been using Zabbix for ten years. I have deployed it in my infrastructure.

I have integrated it with Grafana.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

Depending on the customer and their infrastructure, it could be easy. If it is a small infrastructure the installation could be quite quick. You could fire up SCCM, sent the probes, let them detect it, and put it in. 

For large infrastructures or complex networks, it can be more difficult. It can take as long as a day to get it all set up and running or it could even take a week.

One of the joys of SCCM is that one person could easily maintain it but we have two people from the service desk.

They are always changing their price model, which I don't like. It would be better if they didn't keep adjusting their price model.

The price model is different for every client. It depends on the corporation, the company's subscription balance, and how many machines they have. For us, it fluctuates. 

Some clients have a smaller infrastructure, and for those with large infrastructures, it will cost them more. Others will also have multiple versions of it for backup and failovers.

I was looking for a comparison to see if I want to propose them to some of my clients.

If you are implementing from new, go with Intune directly, don't use the on-premises version.

With the transitioning state to the cloud versions, I would rate SCCM a seven out of ten.

They have handled desktops very well but they haven't transitioned servers very well.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is used for ingenuity and automation.

The configuration of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could be improved, it is a bit complicated.

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for a few years.

The stability is very good.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is very scalable.

The support from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is good, they are friendly.

The initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is straightforward. The time it takes for the process depends on the environment, typically it can take one day.

There is not a license needed to use the solution. 

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