Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) Reviews

I primarily use this solution to deploy software, to deploy patches, to deploy drivers, and to do software package updates. I'm not using all of the functionality that it has but another thing I do is push out Windows upgrades. Rather than doing them all at once, I push out the feature updates.

It is set up on a VMware virtual machine.

When I first joined the company, the director and the other help desk associates were going to each computer to do updates and patches. At the time, we had 274 computers in the building, and I felt that there had to be a way that it could be automated.

One of the problems is that in order to get the updates completed, we were coming in on Saturday, which meant that they had to pay us overtime to get things done. When I started digging, I realized that you could use the SDA for automatic deployments and things of that nature. I was able to configure it to do what I needed to do.

I set up certain floors to be deployed during the night. The schedule was to complete 30 or 40 computers a night until they were finished. Then, when my director came to ask how the progress was, and I told him that the job was complete, he was shocked. It used to take them between two and three months to do the same thing.

Especially with the pandemic, where one day I have an employee in the office to work but the next day I don't, Quest has been instrumental in completing these tasks. With a couple of mouse clicks, I can get the job done.

The single pane of glass for managing devices is helpful because it allows me to perform updates and control things without having to disturb the doctors or nurses. The update process is transparent to them.

This solution provides us with IT asset management, software asset management, compliance, and patch management. This combination of features is important to us because we are able to perform all of these tasks without interrupting anybody's workflow. The most important thing is that we don't want to interrupt a doctor when they are with a patient and without Quest, if something critical needs to happen then I might have to wait to get into the office. During this time, the system could be vulnerable. Using a system with all of these capabilities and being able to use it after hours is key in IT.

The system makes it easy to update and configure things in our environment. If you get stuck then there are well-thought-out KBs available, and you can also ask people in the community. Personally, it has made my job easier. It's not as hands-on and it's more auditable.

Quest has absolutely saved me time, which I would estimate to be between two and three hours a day, easily. With the automations, things flow the way I need them to flow. When Windows updates come out on Tuesday, rather than deploying them on the weekend, we deploy them to all of the computers every Thursday. Because there is no more work to do on the weekends, it saves the company money, especially in overtime.

The automation helps on both ends. For one, you don't have the labor costs that you have to pay for in overtime. A lot of the things that we used to have to do by hand, I can now automate through the system. Then, at the same time, the work is getting done at the time you set it for. There is no "people factor", where they may not move as fast as expected. It happens, for example, that as people get tired, they get slower. Automation greatly diminishes the time that we spend going from one desk to the next. When I do it with the click of a button, everything is going to be done at that exact moment. 

The most valuable feature is the ability to deploy Windows features during off-hours times, through all of the machines at one time versus trying to systematically do them either by area or by floor. I can set one floor to automatically update on Thursday, the next one on Friday, the next one on Saturday, and so forth until I get everybody done. Doing it this way doesn't negatively impact my productivity, nor does it affect anybody else. Updates can be done in the middle of the night.

Using this system is pretty straightforward. When I first joined the company and started using it, a lot of it for me was reading the knowledge base to find out what it was capable of doing. Originally, the only things that they were using it for were popups and ticketing. When I took over, I started the software deployment, driver deployment, updates, and those types of things.

I still don't use the system to its full potential but I now use at least 90% of it.

The systems deployment appliance (SDA) is one of the main features that I use on a regular basis. A lot of the time, I won't do a feature update using the software deployment function. Instead, I will build an image on the SDA. That way, as I need to deploy it, I can do so at will. It gives me the ability to deploy to 10 machines at a time, which means that I can complete most of the stuff that I need to do over a period of time. It's as easy as can be; I'd say that it's as simple as cutting butter.

I would like to be able to deploy an image to more than 10 computers at a time. When we have to do a rebuild on these machines, although it is rare, I would like to be able to do more than 10 at a time. With the current limit, it slows me down because I have to set up 10, then the next 10, and so forth.

My client started working with Quest KACE Systems Management in 2014 but personally, I began using it in 2016.

I have not had a problem other than just recently when I started having issues with a library and a few of the files being corrupted. But, whenever I've called technical support, they've been generally on the spot for getting things fixed, and getting me back up and running. As such, it hasn't really affected my environment much.

My downtime, the first time they had to fix it, was about a day. The most recent time, I wasn't down but I could tell that they were working. Overall, the issue with corrupted files hasn't affected me.

In an environment like this, where you can't afford to be down, it is critical that you have premium support. It is definitely a factor that should be considered when purchasing other products.

The scalability is fantastic. You can add to it and there are lots of things that you can do but it's overkill for us at the clinic.

There were two of us administering the solution and there are about 274 endpoints. Since the other administrator recently quit, it is only me doing the job at the moment.

The technical support people are awesome. In the beginning, I dealt with a few of them that seemed like they just didn't want to be there, so I just would hang up with those people. Lately, in the last couple of years, I have not had any problems. Everybody I've dealt with has been happy to be on the call and glad to help.

We use Quest premium support and the biggest thing that stands out to me is that it's available 24-7. Sometimes, things will happen outside of the eight to five range and when it does, I need that ability to be able to call them and get someone on the phone. That's the major value for us.

There are other pluses with premium support but given that we have moved it from a physical appliance to a virtual appliance, right now it's just the 24-7 support that is important for us. Having the premier support had added value to our overall investment with Quest. It's worth what you pay for it because they are literally there. In a mission-critical system, such as a clinic, you can't have wait periods of two to four hours before technical support starts working on the problem. When a patient system or a lab system is down, you can't wait around for somebody to figure out if and when they're going to call you.

They did not use a similar solution prior to Quest KACE.

When the person who set up Quest first joined the company, he wanted to modernize things. People were leaving post-it notes or written notes on everyone's desk, and he wanted to implement a system to improve the clinic's way of doing business.

When he implemented the system, he implemented it with Active Directory to make it more fluent so that when something happened, they didn't have to go from one desk to the next desk.

I was not with the company for the initial setup, although I have spoken with people about it. What I have been told is that when the system was first purchased, they paid for support to help walk them through the setup. I have not heard that it was difficult but I do recall that it took some time to get everything configured.

We purchased KACE through a reseller, Netrix.

It was deployed in-house by my former director, with assistance from technical support. At that time, it was Dell technical support.

One person is enough for maintenance because it is not hard at all. Click a button and it's updated. You also have to make sure that your host is updated. It's pretty simple.

If I was on the outside looking in, where I had never dealt with it before, based on everything it does I would think it is quite complicated to operate and keep functional. It's definitely the opposite of that.

Our clinic's ROI is a saving in time and money. Prior to having this solution, we were sometimes in a position where there would be three of us working on it, and we'll all be working overtime. When you take that away, it is a big saving. For example, I have been here for five years and if I were putting in two weekends a month over the entire time, it is a lot of money that has been saved.

In terms of pricing and licensing, my advice is that you need to assess what you need and then look at what they offer. It's easy to get caught up in the things that you want, but don't really need. You really want to assess what's best for your environment and to plan it very well.

Ideally, if there is a project manager available then they should help with the planning because you want your end goal to be in line with what you are trying to do. A reseller will try to sell you everything under the sun, so it's important that you plan well and know what is required in your environment. 

I don't believe that the company evaluated other products. My understanding is that the reseller we used made the recommendation and we went with that.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to take your time. I suggest doing it on a Saturday but if your production is in an area that can't be down because you have to sync with Active Directory, then choose a time where you won't interfere with anybody's ability to work. It may require rebooting your DC and that is something that can't be done without affecting people in your environment.

For organizations running two DCs, it probably won't affect them at all. However, in our situation, where we use single sign-on, we really want to make sure that any downtime doesn't affect our users.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is to read the knowledge base.

We had a transitionary period where I was taking over and my director was leaving. The system needed to be updated but part of the system was not paid for. Once it was updated, I found out that they no longer support physical servers, so we had to move it to a VM. That was a bit cumbersome but the important part that I learned is to keep your licenses current. If they expire because you are behind in paying for them then it puts you in a more difficult position when you renew.

Overall, this is a good solution that saves us time and effort. Other than the limit of having only 10 images deployed at once, I don't see anything else that I want to improve. I control everything through VMware and I'm pretty good at it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

With KACE Systems Management, we can deploy this specialized software for students and teachers in separate computer rooms. In the beginning, we used a master PC. We edited one PC with all the usable software, then enrolled this master PC at the beginning of the semester. However, a big problem was when (in the middle of the semester) one of the teachers told us, "We needed another software," or, "We need updates." We did not have the possibility to go into the computer rooms during our work time. We had to do it at night and on the weekends. That was a big problem for us, so we looked for a solution to this problem. So, we installed the specialized software for the students and teachers in a short amount of time.

During the first years, we used the hardware/server from Dell in our environment. We then switched to the virtual appliance, which we use now in our network for one of my university's faculties.

It is a private cloud because we can't use a third-party cloud due to data protections for our university researchers.

There is a course for students where they learn to build buildings. They have to buy parts for the buildings: stones, wood, etc. The updates for the software come inside one semester, and we have two semesters in one year. Inside of a semester, there will be a very important update for the teacher. So, in April and October, we have to update this software during the semester. We get the new software and install it on one of our test PCs, then we create an executable file and ZIP file with all the configurations for our environment. Then, we distribute it with KACE Systems Management. 

With the information from KACE Systems Management, I am able to make a report. For example, in the next 30 days, if the pro support is running out, it is very important to see that because I can then extend the pro support for our hardware. In another example, the reports allow us to see if older software is not working after an update, which is also interesting and important for us.

The scripting part increases IT productivity because of the specialized software in our environments for students' courses. You need to use software which is not programmed by developers. A lot of software for building houses or other things is developed by normal guys, who do not have much skill in programming. When you need to install this type of software, it is very difficult. You have to install registry keys, etc. For that, it is very good to use the scripting part of this solution. So, you can automate this part as well.

• Reports
• The security part with updates
• Patch management, because we can update all the standards and software in our environment. 
• Asset management with license compliance 
• The overview with all the Dell EMC-specialized information.

We use only Dell EMC hardware in our environment. Therefore, it is good for us to use a system which can read information from hardware.

It has a single interface for us to be able to see everything that we might need for the endpoint management of devices, which is absolutely important. We also use the single sign-on service. Of course, we have other systems in our environment which we use for DHCP servers and to manage other things, but for this kind of information, it is very good for us that there is only one system that I have to use; where I can see everything I need for asset management and license compliances as well as for the monitoring of the system, e.g., which system is active and which system maybe was not there in the last two or three days or weeks.

The asset management and license compliances are very important and good for us to see which software is over-licensed or under-licensed.

I use their patch management to look at the security of our systems. Because of the research programs and the researchers who use these software systems and the computer, that is all secured for intrusion detections or interventions from criminals. So, it is very important for us that the patch management is working 100 percent.

It is a little bit difficult to use the license compliances because you need to decide when you are using the software catalog if you are using it with their license compliance or the normal software part. Under the inventory, you can use software as a menu link or software catalog. Most of my specialist software is not in the software catalog. When I try to import them, in my license compliances overview, there are cryptic names for this software that I have to import. That is not very good for the reports that I use. When I take them to my bosses, they see cryptic names of software that they don't understand. It would be much better for me if I could use software and the software catalog as well for the license compliances. 

If it could be possible to use GUI to create reports, where I could drag and drop like in Microsoft Access where you can create reports, e.g., when you take columns from tables from the drag and drop menu, then you can slide it down in another area and sort columns or create new columns. This would be nice to see in the graphical user interface as well as be much more developed for the reporting part than it is at the moment.

It has been at least 10 years. We started with the physical appliance from Dell.

It is a very stable system. In the last 10 years, there has been only one breach to the system. That was very quickly closed with the help of the technical support. I can't remember another problem with the system where it went down. 

We can buy new licenses for clients. There is no problem to import these new clients into the environment, which is pretty nice.

We are using SMA at its full potential at the moment. It is also possible to import printers, and you don't need any extra licenses for that. This is a nice feature as well.

What has been very good for me has been the ITNinja websites where I can look for information. For example, if I need something, then there has been a solution there. Also, the help system of the help sites inside of the KACE Systems Management Appliance are very helpful and easy to understand.

I use the support system of the KACE. So, I use the ticket system to stay in contact with KACE support, which has been very good for me. It has been very positive because they know what to do. Every time, I have had a solution in a couple of days, and that was very good for me. 

I use the ITNinja websites. I think KACE developed these ITNinja websites with Dell EMC, which has a lot of information about KACE SMA and SDA. We don't use third-party companies. We only use KACE support when needed.

We don't use WSUS in our environment anymore. However, we also don't use SMA for Windows updates. We use the Windows updates on the Microsoft website.

In the beginning, when you try to install new software, you need a little bit more time. That's absolutely normal. Then, I installed this software on over 160 PCs. In the past, I had to go to every PC in real-time by remoting on every PC and installing the computer software on every PC. Now, I can install the software in half an hour. In the past, I needed two days. For me, this has been very good. It has been very nice to see how fast it can install new/used software on new hardware.

For every upgrade over the years, SMA has been very intuitive and easy to use. Also, when I changed the physical appliance to the virtual appliance four or five years ago, it was easier to make a backup. Then, I could import the backup from the physical SMA to the virtual SMA. That was very easy to make. The surface of the website has not changed very much in its paths, which are very good. Parts of those paths are easier to look inside or adopt more functionality, but the surface is not so state of the art. Some websites, like WordPress sites, are a little bit difficult to see where information is and what to look for. However, in the KACE Systems Management, I know where the information is, and that is very good for me.

To deploy the appliance, it takes maybe an hour with all of the configuration and the DHCP server. When you start a system for the first time, you have to import all the information that you need or connect your clients with a system, which needs a bit more time. Also, when you are trying to distribute software, you need more time with the managed installations. I needed half a year with all my software products, maybe longer. For all my software products, I had to use them with a managed installation script or other scripting tools. However, if you have used other systems, then you can very quickly switch to SMA.

Two to four people are needed for deployment. In my environment, we have a network administrator and me as an administrator for the system. There are also one or two other administrators for the solution in my company.

We saw ROI after the first year. Every year, the system becomes so much more valuable for us. Maybe the quality of our service is much better now. The students at our university can use more software, so the knowledge of students using state-of-the-art software is much better than in the past. We can react to requests from our teachers when they want to use new software in their courses. We can manage that in a short amount of time.

Most of the time, we install software in two months between semesters. So, we are saving four or five days over the year.

We are a university. So, we have a very good price for the system. I think the price for the system is worth it because of the security patch management. The security patch management is very important for us. The price is very good for KACE SMA, the functionality you get, and the patch management. 

The technical support you get from KACE is sometimes priceless. Sometimes, you don't need very much support. However, if you need support, it is good for me to know that there are people who have very good knowledge about the system. I am willing to pay for that.

When we bought the SMA system, we researched other systems. I did some tests with SCCM and other systems as well as open-source software. It was very difficult for me to configure the other systems. Also, the open-source software was a bit too difficult for me to configure just in time. There was not so much time for me to sit there for a couple of weeks doing trial and error. 

I am very happy that I found a solution which was easy to install and use. That is also a reason for me to look at SDA from Quest because I know the system and it works fine. I don't have time to configure a new system from scratch. It just has to work.

It is very important for me to see that there is one GUI/website where I can have an overview of my computers and environment, see which computers are healthy, which ones might be damaged, or if everything is fine with the software. Another thing is that I can distribute software with executable files using the system. This was also a very important reason to use SMA because we have so many software systems where you get only a setup executable file, not an MSI file to convert the executable file, which is sometimes very time-sensitive.

I had a very good start with the software because I had training with one of the specialists from Dell EMC in the past, which was very good. Now, it is very intuitive for me to use the software, which is also very good. It is very clear. You can look for information in one of the paths, such as, home inventory monitoring and asset management. 

When you buy this software, use a bit more money and buy a training program as well. What you learn in such a short amount of time when you get the training is so much more valuable than when you do trial and error for yourself. That is my advice. They will help you to configure your environment in a very short time, then you can use it very quickly.

Mobile device management is not very important for us at the moment because we only use our physical PCs and sometimes our laptops. I have used tablets as well. However, for mobile devices, we don't distribute software on these kinds of systems. 

I am on a way to using KACE's Systems Deployment Appliance in the future. At the moment, we only use KACE SMA, but I want to try to buy SDA as well. I hope that I can this year. It makes total sense to use SDA as well when you use SMA. Both systems are integrated with one another. At the moment, we have installed the operating system on the computer physically. This is a very bad time with the pandemic, as it is very difficult for us to go to our workplace and into the computer rooms. Doing our work there physically is not possible now. I live in the UK at the moment and my work is in Berlin, Germany, so it is very difficult for me to go there and install new hardware. However, I am looking forward to getting SDA as well.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of 10.

We Primarily use KACE as a diverse deployment and management solution. 

Our environment includes multiple locations, so having a single point of deployment for automation/patches/software/scripts and response management is ideal. 

We work in the banking industry, so having this single point and not having to worry about security is enormous. We have to go through multiple government security audits a year and our auditors are always blown away with our KACE environment. We need KACE to keep our organization going.

Previously, we were working with upwards of 200 different applications and tools, the amount of compatibility issues and clutter was unbelievable. One update on one application could ruin a whole environment at times. Thank goodness we found KACE to consolidate our environment and really cut down on resources! 

They've saved us so much time and money it's unreal. They have so much flexibility in what you want to configure or script. In some of my deployments, I've built entire applications on KACE to work with, while in others I have small built-in batch files. The only thing that limits KACE is your imagination.

The ability to build scripts right on the deployment center itself, as well as building groups that take those scripts/task chains has been absolutely invaluable and one of the most important parts of my whole environment. Without it, we would need to hire at least six to seven more employees to do what I'm able to do myself with those tools. 

On top of this, they have multiple forums that are super active. I've gone to tech support, ITninja, and even Reddit. One time, I asked a question on the KACE subReddit on how to improve a function and a KACE team member responded in five minutes. That's honestly unheard of for a company like this.

The GUI needs some work. I love all that it can do, however, it can be just be so cluttered at times. I wish we could see them spend some time improving the interface.

Sometimes when I run certain functions or need to do a one-off massive deployment, it lacks in "mobility". It can be a pain, having to go back a page and re-type in all the same information in the "run now" tab when I have a whole bunch of one-off situations. It's not like I can't do what I need to do, however, I seem to just spend more time than I'd like having to type in the same information over and over.

I've used the solution for the past five years.

In all the years we've had this product we've never had a stability issue.

The solution can scale. The product can be a help desk ticket system, all the way up to the entirety of your virtual machine environment - making updates and changes at a click of a button.

They take their role in support extremely seriously. We don't have to reach out too often due to the lack of problems, however, when we do, they respond within an hour or two at the very longest.

Positive

We did not use another solution. Once we got KACE, I just don't understand how we held on for so long without it.

We had a vendor assist us so that we never had a single hiccup during the entire setup.

The vendor was, without a doubt, an expert. We assisted and learned everything they could teach us.

We had ROI about a year into this and have saved so much ever since.

If your team is small like ours, I highly recommend working with an install vendor. For us, it wasn't as much a technically challenging thing to implement as much as what the vendor showed us during setup and installation that was just so helpful. With their help, we were able to hit the ground running and had much less of a learning curve.

Other options were discussed however, it was so long ago I can't recall what they were.

I would say start by looking at all of the services/products that KACE offers - don't feel overwhelmed as they will integrate very well with each other.

We use it for a lot of things. We use it to deploy software, configure Windows via scripts, and to deploy some certificates for our customers. We are a call center and we have a lot of large companies as clients, so we need to deploy several kinds of software, such as Office 365 and applications from our customers themselves. We use a scripting framework from our consultants and that works great.

KACE SMA is the main software I'm using. I'm responsible for the KACE solution, and if there are any questions related to it, my colleagues come to me.

We have local KACE Appliances with VMware workstations, computers, servers, and we are using OVF files.

It saves a lot of time because, in the past, before we used KACE, when we installed a new version of a given software, we had to go to each computer individually and install it manually. Now we just set the labels and the software goes by itself. It also saves a lot of money because we have time to do other jobs.

We have seven locations. In the past, if we had to deploy new software or install user PCs, we had to drive with a large number of people to get the work done quickly. Now, we can deploy the software from one desktop. One person can do it and that saves a lot of time. It makes a lot of things easier. It has had a huge impact.

Another example of a benefit is that I developed a script because my CEO wanted to know how many computers are connected to our home office network from the outside. Every hour I run the script to import the information to an external SQL Server Express with a report engine. With the KACE, you can use information for other reports.

The most valuable feature is the software deployment. That's the main thing we use, daily, all day long.

It's also very intuitive and easy to handle. It's clearly structured. For example, we are still using Microsoft Intune as our MDM software. With Intune, you get lost very quickly, but with KACE SMA, it's clearly structured and easy to understand.

We handle our local computers within the company with it. We handle our home-office computers as well. We have about 3,000 computers in SMA and, currently, about 1,200 computers are in our home office with it. Everything goes, everything's possible, without problems. We couldn't ask for more. We are able to manage all of the devices in the solution's single pane of glass. We see our computers there.

It also does patch management. At the moment, I'm rolling out a new feature update, 20.8.2, and it's a great challenge because we have to deploy it to 1,200 computers in the home office. We want to do it without interrupting production, but KACE is reliable and it's easy to adapt it to my needs for how and when to deploy the feature update.

Another feature we use is the Systems Deployment Appliance. If we install new computers, we run a script within the SDA at the end of the installation and that installs the required software for the computer, depending on which department it is part of. "Customer A" needs this set of software and we have a system image for it. And for "Customer B" we have another image with other software. We just have to start the computer, choose the required image, and everything is done automatically. There is no need to configure it. We just deploy Windows and, when that's done, shut it down, bring it to the location, connect it, and it works. Some software needs some manual configuration because it's not scriptable, but about 95 percent is automated.

KACE.uservoice.com is a platform where users can post suggestions for improving the software. A lot of ideas that have ended up in the development of KACE have come from this. For example, in version 10.2 KACE implemented the possibility of reducing the network speed of the KACE agent. You can set it so that it takes whatever network speed you want or you can set it to 5 Mb, to save network speed. You set it for all the computers, but it would be preferable to separate between VPN connections in our home office and the local area. It would be great to be able to set separate speeds for different VLANs. I posted this idea on Uservoice.

I've been using Quest KACE Systems Management for five or six years.

There have been no problems. It has never crashed. If I hadn't had to update it, it would just run.

Scaling it is easy. Last year I increased the memory because we got a lot of new computers in our company and we added some new locations. I saw it was getting a little bit slower, but I added some more memory and it was easy to scale. If you need more RAM or more CPUs, just add them and the KACE will say, "Okay, I'll take them."

Currently, we don't have plans to increase our usage.

We use their standard technical support and our experience with them has been great. Every time I have asked them something it has been perfect. I get quick answers, especially from one of the Quest technicians in Cologne, Germany.

Before I came to the IT department, we used software from CA. It was a pain. But we switched because of the price. Also, the support wasn't that good from CA, as far as I remember. That was before my time. I moved to my current position after we shut down the CA software deployment.

The initial setup is very easy. Before we upgraded to the current version—from 10.2 to 11.0—I tried it here on my local virtual machine. It took about five minutes and the SMA was running. That was how long it took from starting the virtual machine until the moment I got to the login screen. The information from Quest itself in the support area of their webpage, and on YouTube, is very effective and informative. It's easy.

It takes a little more configuration after logging in, because you have to deploy the KACE agent and create a token. To get everything working, the grids, the configuration, with Active Directory, it might take about half a day until you can say, "Okay, the KACE is working. I've downloaded the test catalog. The KACE agent is deploying on the computers and the computers are coming into the database."

My team consists of three people, including me. One person is mainly taking care of the software installations. He's looking at whether there are any new versions. I am taking care of the feature updates and software deployment, and the third person is my apprentice.

Users of SMA in our company include our service desk, our client and service first-level support. A total of about 20 people from our IT department.

The initial setup was done with our consultant, Stephan Sporrer, from OFF LIMITS IT. At that time it took five days, but at that time we also scripted all the software installations we have. He also taught us how to use it.

Setup took longer the first time because he had to teach us the whole system. Now, if I had to set up a whole new environment, it would take half a day because I know how it works.

The pricing and licensing are absolutely fair.

As far as I know there are no other costs that come with using it. It's just the licenses for the KACE based on the number of computers. Our VMware servers already existed, so there were no other costs for us.

In the future, we are looking at implementing a proof of concept for the KACE MDM, so our iPhones would be manageable with KACE SMA as well. Quest MDM is very intuitive and easy to handle. There is no comparison to Intune. If you don't work with Intune eight hours a day, every day, you get lost. In the KACE product, it's simple and easy. It's very easy for me to train new colleagues to use the KACE MDM, SMA, and SDA.

KACE MDM is also much cheaper than Intune. I calculated the savings with KACE MDM over a three-year period and they came to about €25,000, just on the licenses. That's a lot of money. And the time saved can't be measured. In the next month there will be more work with it because we have to upgrade all our iPhones. After that it will be easier because we can automate a lot of things with the policies, with restrictions and packages within the KACE MDM. When a new phone comes in we will bring it into the MDM, and the software will be automatically deployed. This will save a lot of time because Intune requires you to do a lot more steps. It's too complex for us.

We didn't evaluate any options other than KACE. The supplier of all our computers suggested KACE and that's how we came to it.

The biggest lesson I have learned from using KACE SMA is to never deploy software to many computers at one time. A few times in the past I killed the network with it. It's not good if you deploy a new Office 365 installation to about 700 computers at one time.

We're running Salesforce, which is older than the KACE, as our ticketing system. Because that ticketing system already exists, our CEO doesn't want to change it. They're planning to connect Salesforce with the SMA to grab the information from the computers. That way, my colleagues at the service desk will just have to type in the computer to see all the information that is stored in the KACE SMA. That's something that is currently planned but not implemented yet.

We have used it as a help-desk ticketing system, a software deployment platform, a patch management platform, and a hardware inventory platform.

KACE is incredibly wide in terms of what it will do for you. In certain cases, it's too much for my small businesses. Most of the companies that I support are anywhere from ten to fifty people. Whereas, KACE is such a large piece of software. It has its advantages as well as disadvantages for my businesses. It's just too big.

I think KACE could be designed a little bit more intuitively in terms of administration. Their knowledge-based articles are very good. But one of the things Microsoft does well is that they bake in a lot of the instructions and make the UI design a little bit more intuitive. So if you're flowing through something, the need to go back to the manual with Microsoft and it is not as heavy as it is with KACE. It is not necessarily always a good thing, but I would say KACE feels like an old-school piece of software. You need to make sure you've got the manual open while you're utilizing it.

Now I am trying to get the right size solution for my small businesses.

I have been using this solution for around eighteen months, probably. We just upgraded to version thirteen from eleven.

They are nice and stable. I would rate it nine out of ten.

I can't say I have had many experiences in making it scalable. With my businesses, I have never had to grow from fifty to a thousand employees.

I have used their technical support before. They are good. You pay a lot of money for their support and updates, but they do assist you when necessary. I have had positive experiences with them.

For the size of the company that I typically support, it's hard for me to say yes. I think I'm trying to kill a fly with a shotgun while utilizing KACE.

Coming from a small business standpoint, they're really expensive for the number of users. But that's not necessarily a knock against them. They're producing a piece of software for a particular segment. I just do not think they necessarily designed their virtual appliance and their support for a ten-person company. They are expensive, but are they unjustifiably expensive? I can't say that.

In my opinion, what KACE does better than Intune is third-party patch management. I think that Microsoft Intune and KACE both have the same technical functionality. But Microsoft Intune takes quite a bit of scripting in third-party management. Intune is always a lot cheaper and offers a lot of their packages as well. You have to consider what you need and what you are paying for. I would say that's the big difference between the two so far for my particular use.

Do a lot of research and make sure it fits your use case. If you're a small business, the likelihood of it being worth it to you in my opinion is minimal. If you've got a large environment where you can dedicate technical resources for managing the KACE system, onboarding and offboarding users monthly, and supporting a good number of devices and applications then maybe it works. But for a small business, is the juice worth the squeeze? I don't know.

I would like to rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use it for the asset management of all our computers, servers, desktops, and laptops that are internal and external. We have multiple offices who use it to deploy some of our software. It is the system that we use for our help desk when people have issues.

We were using a physical server with a physical device up until the end of last year. Now, it is a virtual device but we are still hosting it internally.

It gets everybody on the same standard, standardizing software and versions. That is one of the key things to it. Everybody has the same version of stuff. It helps with reporting by seeing who doesn't have that same version and the help desk side of having one place for people to put in their help or technical support requests. 

It has one place where we can look at the history. For example, if several people are having the problem, we can go look at how we solved the problem last time. So, it provides us with historic data.

There is one place for a lot of different things. If somebody has a problem with their computer, they will put in a ticket. From there, we will know who it is and the assets assigned to them, because there is one place to go look for what we are talking about and with whom we are talking. Just having one place for everything is really convenient. For example, we are able to deploy software to hundreds of computers. We don't need to go to each individual device.

It seems to do what we need it to do. It is pretty intuitive.

In regards to managing computers, our help desk, and handling help desk tickets, it is a single pane of glass for what we need. This includes the reporting and our asset management, e.g., when we loan things out. This is one of the key reasons that we are keeping it. It is not six different systems.

We use it for IT asset management, software asset management, and patch management. These features are all very important for us. Without each one of them, it would be problematic. It is easier to use them all in one place. We do not need to jump to different systems or technologies to do things because we could do it from this solution.

The customization of the interface needs improvement for things like end user tickets. While the functionality is good, some of that UI stuff does need improvement. Though, I don't receive a lot of complaints about it.

Some of the reporting could be a little more intuitive. This is something that could be worked on.

You really need to take the training. There is a learning curve when using it because it is just different from other things. 

There are some newer things coming out where it won't cover quite as much with some of the Microsoft Azure stuff.

I have been using it for at least eight years.

The stability is good. There were some people who were hesitant to go onto the VM, but we did have a physical appliance. We haven't had any issues with it, hardware-wise or software-wise. There have been the occasional questions, but it is reliable as far I am concerned.

It has scaled for us. We are not using thousands of machines, but we are definitely double what we were, and it wasn't even noticeable.

We have hundreds of people putting tickets in. There are six help desk admins who are using it to administer and handle help desk tickets

We have a support contract with them. If there is a critical issue, I can call them and talk to somebody. 

The technical support has been pretty good. We haven't had any huge issues. There have been a few questions here and there over the years. When I have needed stuff, e.g., if there is a big upgrade, I will definitely reach out and call them to get a little background on what is going on and what to expect when we do it. They have been receptive to that. They have gotten back to us quickly.

When we switched over to the VM, we had some issues at first. We called them. We definitely were able to talk to somebody right away. 

They have been receptive and helpful. The people that I have talked to have been very helpful and knowledgeable. They have understood the issues and got through them quickly, which is definitely a positive.

I would rate technical support as nine out of 10 because there is always room for improvement.

Positive

We used Track-It! for some of our components previously, which definitely didn't do everything. In that case, it was just for asset management, not even for the help desk stuff. We switched to Quest KACE for what it offered and all the capabilities of what it did.

We watched quite a few demos, then we did a mini demo onsite where we applied it to a handful of computers for testing.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was well-documented. It was one of the better solutions that I have had to implement.

The deployment took about a week, then we did another week of monitoring. If we would have pushed it, then we probably could have been done in a couple days.

When we bought it, there was an implementation period. We were one-on-one with somebody who walked us through the setup process. A little after that, we customized some stuff a bit more for our environment.

It definitely saves us all kinds of time and value.

For a software solution in the past doing this stuff, it would probably take us a week to get software deployed everywhere. Now, we are able to do it in a couple nights with just a variety of things, e.g., people not restarting computers. It saves us well over half the time because we are not having to touch individual things or micromanage them.

It definitely frees up time. We are not doing redundant things on multiple machines, which frees us up to do other stuff. It makes us more responsive and able to come up with solutions faster when fixing some people's problems.

We definitely looked at a few options. When we got it, one of the key things was the pricing. It was good compared to some of the other solutions. Some of the other solutions were just astronomical in price compared with KACE and didn't necessarily have the ease of use either. So, we chose Quest KACE for its easy-to-use features and cost.

Quest KACE's ease of use is good, and it has gotten better. It was never bad. Compared to other solutions that we looked at, Quest KACE was nicer and easier to use, but there was definitely a learning curve. 

We are still using it. We are not even thinking about using anything else, e.g., Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager (formerly System Center) which is way easier to use. 

I would recommend watching demos and getting hands-on demonstrations.

We are in talks about getting the solution's Systems Deployment Appliance (SDA). It is on our wish list.

I would rate the solution overall as eight out of 10. The reporting and UI could be improved. Some of the other solutions are a little more user-friendly.

Every day, we do patching and updating of Windows Drivers. We also have to activate new software packages from firewall or VPN to Adobe software on a regular basis. We then use it very often and gladly to exchange files from directories, so people don't ask, "Please change this document to this document." We would rather do this through the system, exchanging various documents inside it. 

We do inventory to see whether:

• A machine is working fine, e.g.. hardware load.
• Systems are regularly shutting down. 
• A monitor is closed on a laptop.

This is exactly how the system works.

We are currently using the K1000 appliance. We now have it as a standalone, using it for software distribution.

We also have a hardware appliance. It is not worse than the last version of the hardware appliance. We don't have a virtualized one yet, but we are going in that direction.

Quest KACE Systems Management provides a single pane of glass with everything that we need for endpoint management of all devices. It allows us to run multiple processes in parallel, i.e., parallelization. We have been able to assign a lot to many users at once. So, if somehow there is a critical error or a software is not working properly, then we mostly notice this on one user but can transfer the effect/result to all of them right away. That has worked very well because we don't have an internal environment to work with, which is why it is a good thing that we can achieve a lot and distribute it simultaneously.

When we had to quickly switch from Office 365 to an Office local installation, which we used to have, people were cut off from the Office 365 license from now on because we no longer paid for it. We then got a call from a department, “Our 12 employees need our university Office application that we used before." That could be implemented very quickly. People didn't have to come to us, we didn't have to go there, and everything was done without seeing each other. This was very good and flexible, and no effort was needed.

The environment is worth it when rolling out new software, and we test it on this device.

We use the system every day because there is always something that someone needs. We just take a look to see if the system is working fine.

I have an “extended arm” through this agent, where I can distribute things very quickly, even to people who are in their home office and need some software. I can assign it. Then, in a short time, if the Internet works for the remote station, everything is available as quickly as possible. Logically, this is one of the greatest and most comfortable things for me.

In terms of updating and customizing, the solution is very good and flexible.

For patch management that we do in an automated way, it is great. We just check whether everything works and is done automatically. Therefore, it provides a great help.

I still need better communication about which processes are really due and which processes are currently being processed. According to the initial setup service provider, there is still no real management or overview on KACE where you can really see 100 percent of what is going on as well as what is going to be processed next and whether I can influence the overall process. It could really help me if I knew, e.g. exactly in 10 minutes my colleague will be supplied with this or that software. I haven't found this yet. If they could add this, that would be cool. It is still missing and I haven't yet found something like this.

Sometimes, if you copy and paste someone incorrectly, then you can also assign the wrong software and that can then lead to problems where you distribute the wrong software.

We have been using this solution since 2017.

The stability is indestructible.

We haven’t been scaling much. We don't have full utilization and are under 300 clients, and its scalability works.

We have two administrators and 140 users. Some users have two PCs, but most have only one PC.

The technical support has these pages, subpages, etc. If we can't find it on the Internet, then we go through Software Factory GmbH.

We did not previously use another solution. We only have experience with KACE Systems Management.

The deployment took three weeks. It's a service, so sometimes it takes awhile. The fragmented architecture that we have is a wide variety of PC systems, which was another problem. We still have different locations. In order to re-inventory them and get an overview of what is missing everywhere, we needed a strategy to make all the software identical, even if the hardware was different. This can be mapped well with this software.

We had the initial setup done by a service provider, which was ok. However, there were still a lot of question marks. Another company really helped us later. We also used another service provider who was once a technician at Quest, working as self-employed. We came very far with him and that gave us another boost, so we achieved more productivity after he showed us a few tricks.

We are now dealing with Software Factory GmbH from Nürtingen. They are very professional and have a solution for all our problems. It does cost extra, but Software Factory GmbH from Nürtingen really knows their business. They are much better than the provider for the initial setup.

Internally, two of us were required for deployment, a colleague and me.

It has definitely proven itself very well. For at least a year now, all changes have been noticed, e.g., decentralization. Because we are in three locations, I used to always have to travel somewhere to configure various things and could do everything only that way. So, it saves time in this case. It is a very good solution.

I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time.

We buy consulting fees from Software Factory, then we pay extra for it.

We did not evaluate other options. Our service provider back then recommended KACE Systems Management as a very good product.

My colleague who knows other software distribution systems says this solution does not rank equally with others. He would move them to third place. I am very happy with the environment. If my colleague could decide, he wouldn't buy this solution. He would buy different software.

Spend more money on training so you can use the product to its fullest.

There is always increased usage during this coronavirus time. Almost every day, we have an increase or decrease in hardware as most people are now changing their laptops for desktop computers.

I would rate KACE somewhere near a nine (out of 10) because I am missing more control in it. 

Foreign Language: (German)

Was ist unser primärer Anwendungsfall?

Jeden Tag machen wir das Patchen und Aktualisieren von Windows Drivers. Außerdem müssen wir regelmäßig neue Softwarepakete von Firewall oder VPN bis zu Adobe-Software aktivieren. Wir verwenden es dann sehr oft und sehr gern, um Dateien aus Verzeichnissen auszutauschen, damit die Leute nicht fragen "Bitte tauschen Sie die Vorlagen gegen die Vorlagen." Wir tun dies lieber über das System, indem wir verschiedene Dokumente darin austauschen.

Wir führen auch Inventarisierung durch, um zu sehen, ob:

• Die Maschine funktioniert einwandfrei, z.B. Hardwarelast.
• Die Systeme werden regelmäßig heruntergefahren.
• Ein Monitor ist auf einem Laptop zugeklappt.

Genau so funktioniert das System.

Wir verwenden derzeit die K1000-Appliance. Wir haben es jetzt als Stand-alone und wir nutzen sie zur Softwareverteilung.

Wir haben auch noch eine Hardware-Appliance. Es ist nicht schlechter als die letzte Auslieferung von der Hardware-Appliance. Wir haben noch keine virtualisierte, aber wir gehen in diese Richtung.


Wie hat es meiner Organisation geholfen?

Quest KACE Systems Management bietet eine zentrale Schnittstelle mit allem, was wir für die Endpoint Management aller Geräte benötigen. Es ermöglicht uns, mehrere Prozesse parallel auszuführen, d.h. Parallelisierung. Wir konnten vielen Benutzern auf einmal viel zuordnen. Wenn also irgendwie ein kritischer Fehler vorliegt oder eine Software nicht richtig funktioniert, dann bemerken wir dies meistens bei einem Benutzer, können die Wirkung/das Ergebnis jedoch sofort auf alle übertragen. Das hat sehr gut funktioniert, weil wir keine interne Umgebung bei uns am arbeiten haben, deswegen ist es wirklich sehr gute Sache, dass wir viel erreichen und gleichzeitig verteilen können.

Als wir schnell von Office 365 auf eine Office-Lokalinstallation umsteigen mussten, die wir früher hatten, wurden die Leute von nun an von der Office 365-Lizenz abgeschnitten, weil wir nicht mehr dafür bezahlt haben. Dann bekamen wir einen Anruf von einer Abteilung: „Unsere 12 Mitarbeiter brauchen unsere Hochschul-Office-Anwendung, die wir benutzt haben.“ Das ließ sich sehr schnell umsetzen. Die Leute mussten nicht zu uns kommen, wir mussten nicht hingehen, und es wurde eben alles sozusagen ohne dass man sich sieht erledigt. Das war sehr gut und flexibel, also kein Aufwand.

Die Umwelt lohnt sich beim Ausrollen von neuer Software und wir testen sie auf diesem Gerät.

Wir nutzen das System jeden Tag, weil es immer etwas gibt, was jemand braucht. Oder wenn wir nur reingucken, ob das System funktioniert.


Was haben wir am wertvollsten gefunden?

Ich habe durch diesen Agenten einen „verlängerten Arm“, wo ich sehr schnell Sachen verteilen kann, auch an Leute, die im Home-Office sind und Software benötigen. Ich kann es zuordnen. Dann in kurzer Zeit, wenn das Internet für die Gegenstelle funktioniert, ist alles schnellstmöglich verfügbar. Logischerweise ist dies für mich eine der tollsten und bequemsten Sache.

In Hinsicht auf Aktualisieren und Anpassen ist die Lösung sehr gut und sehr flexibel.

Für das automatisierte Patch-Management ist es großartig. Wir prüfen nur, ob alles funktioniert und das wird automatisch erledigt dann. Daher bietet es eine große Hilfe.


Was kann verbessert werden?

Ich brauche noch eine bessere Kommunikation darüber, welche Prozesse noch einstehen und welche Prozesse gerade bearbeitet werden. Nach Angaben des Ersteinrichtungsdienstleisters gibt es bei KACE noch keine wirkliche Verwaltung oder Übersicht, wo man wirklich 100 Prozent sehen kann, was gerade läuft und was als nächstes bearbeitet wird und ob ich den Gesamtprozess beeinflussen kann. Es könnte mir wirklich helfen, wenn ich wüsste, z.B. genau in 10 Minuten wird mein Kollege mit dieser oder jener Software versorgt. Das habe ich noch nicht gefunden. Wenn sie das hinzufügen könnten, wäre das toll. Es fehlt noch und ich habe so etwas noch nicht gefunden.

Manchmal, wenn Sie jemanden falsch kopieren und einfügen, können Sie auch die falsche Software zuweisen und das kann dann zu Problemen führen, wenn Sie die falsche Software verteilen.


Wie lange habe ich die Lösung verwendet?

Wir verwenden diese Lösung seit 2017.


Was halte ich von der Stabilität der Lösung?

Die Stabilität ist unverwüstlich.


Was denke ich über die Skalierbarkeit der Lösung?

Wir haben nicht viel skaliert. Wir haben keine volle Auslastung und haben weniger als 300 Clients, und die Skalierbarkeit funktioniert gut.

Wir haben zwei Administratoren und 140 Benutzer. Einige Benutzer haben zwei PCs, aber die meisten haben nur einen PC.


Wie sind Kundenservice und technischer Support?

Der technische Support hat diese Seiten, Unterseiten etc. Sollten wir etwas im Internet nicht finden, dann wenden wir uns an die Software Factory GmbH.


Welche Lösung habe ich vorher verwendet und warum habe ich gewechselt?

Wir haben vorher keine andere Lösung verwendet. Wir haben nur Erfahrung mit KACE Systems Management.


Wie war die Ersteinrichtung?

Der Einsatz dauerte ca. drei Wochen. Es ist ein Service, daher dauert es manchmal eine Weile. Die fragmentierte Architektur, die wir haben, besteht aus einer Vielzahl von PC-Systemen, was ein weiteres Problem war. Wir haben noch verschiedene Standorte. Um sie neu zu inventarisieren und einen Überblick darüber zu bekommen, was überall fehlt, brauchten wir eine Strategie, um die gesamte Software baugleich zu machen, auch wenn die Hardware unterschiedlich war. Dies lässt sich mit dieser Software gut abbilden.


Was ist mit dem Implementierungsteam?

Wir haben die Ersteinrichtung von einem Dienstleister durchführen lassen, was ok war. Allerdings gab es noch viele Fragezeichen. Eine andere Firma hat uns später wirklich geholfen. Wir haben auch einen anderen Dienstleister eingesetzt, der früher als Techniker bei Quest tätig war, dann selbstständig gemacht hat. Wir sind mit ihm sehr weit gekommen und das hat uns einen weiteren Schub gegeben, so dass wir mehr Produktivität erreicht haben, nachdem er uns ein paar Tricks gezeigt hat.

Wir haben es jetzt mit der Software Factory GmbH aus Nürtingen zu tun. Sie sind sehr professionell und haben eine Lösung für alle unsere Probleme. Kostet zwar extra, aber die sind wirklich sehr auf Zack. Sie sind viel besser als der Anbieter für die Ersteinrichtung.

Intern waren zwei von uns für den Einsatz erforderlich, ein Kollege und ich.


Was war unser ROI?

Es hat sich definitiv sehr gut bewährt. Seit mindestens einem Jahr sind alle Veränderungen, wie z.B. die Dezentralisierung, aufgefallen. Da wir an drei Standorten sind, musste ich früher immer irgendwo hinfahren, um verschiedene Dinge zu konfigurieren und konnte alles nur so machen. Das spart in diesem Fall also Zeit. Es ist eine sehr gute Lösung.

Ich kann jetzt Leute erreichen, die ich vorher nicht erreichen konnte. Wir sparen rund 25% Zeit.


Wie sind meine Erfahrungen mit Preisen, Einrichtungskosten und Lizenzierung?

Wir zahlen Beratungshonorare von der Software Factory, dann zahlen wir extra dafür.


Welche anderen Lösungen habe ich in Betracht gezogen?

Andere Optionen haben wir nicht in Betracht gezogen. Unser Dienstleister hat KACE Systems Management damals als sehr gutes Produkt empfohlen.

Mein Kollege, der andere Softwareverteilungssysteme kennt, sagt, dass diese Lösung nicht gleichrangig mit anderen ist. Er würde sie auf Platz 3 schieben. Ich bin sehr zufrieden mit der Umgebung. Wenn mein Kollege entscheiden könnte, würde er diese Lösung nicht kaufen. Er würde andere Software kaufen.


Welche anderen Ratschläge habe ich?

Geben Sie mehr Geld für Schulung aus, damit Sie das Produkt vollgablich nutzen können.

Es gibt immer eine erhöhte Nutzung während dieser Corona-Zeit. Fast jeden Tag haben wir eine Zunahme oder Abnahme der Hardware, da die meisten Leute jetzt ihre Laptops gegen Desktop-Computer austauschen.

Ich würde KACE irgendwo in der Nähe einer Neun (von 10) bewerten, weil mir mehr Kontrolle fehlt.


Welche Version dieser Lösung verwenden Sie derzeit?

K1000

We use the solution for managing our fleet of approximately 1,500 devices. This includes Windows patch management and version control, scripting deployment to workstations as well as managed software deployment to groups and individuals. 

It is also used for creating reports for software use, patching records, and auditing the workstation fleet. We like being able to create custom reports based on any number of internal fields, and the ability to have custom inventory fields too. With it, we can deploy complex software solutions in a controlled manner.

Quest KACE has provided us with a managed environment that surpasses all expectations. The information available via KACE is up to date, critical to our normal operations, and has become the go-to tool of our IT teams for extended support. In our classroom environment, it has saved a lot of time in software deployment.

Having a full report of our estate, which version of Windows is running, whether the device is encrypted, is running the latest AV solution, when the support runs until, et cetera, has been vital. It allows us to maintain a service desk that has all of the most up-to-date information on all workstations.

Full auditing of the Windows estate is the most valuable aspect for us. We are aware this solution can do Apple and Linux-based integration too, however, we simply haven't had the time to explore this so far. 

The managed software deployment is great. We like ensuring a single managed solution can be deployed - rather than having to do a custom install, which is time consuming and error-prone.

Scripting deployment for configuration, removal, or reporting is helpful as well. This has allowed us to ensure we are currently using our workstations and they are correctly implemented for end-users.

The solution needs to add:

• Automated software deployment, rather than manually having to create uninstall packages and running this against a number of manually entered devices. 
• Driver feeds for devices outside of Dell ownership.
• The ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way.
• The ability to integrate quickly with workstations to push out tests/patches.

There is a Resolve issue whereby some workstations no longer report/check-in after a recent update. This is now an open case with Quest Support.

There is a Resolve issue whereby we cannot migrate between VMware hosts.

We have been Quest KACE customers for approximately five years now. We have used the K1000 for device management and K2000 for asset deployment.

The stability is great - it simply never fails!

Scalability is very good. We've been able to expand several times, expanding the number of devices covered with ease. We have also utilised the cloud-based MDM solutions, however, this isn't something we've maintained a licence for due to internal staffing resources.

We have successfully moved away from a hardware-based solution and moved into a virtualised VMWare estate. This has allowed us to integrate the backups of this product within our organisational estate, plus allowed us to migrate the services across various parts of our network, without having to physically change the location of the hardware. This is a great solution for us and removed any hardware blockers that were in place previously and to take advantage of the virtualisation advantages without any major changes to our client estate.

We previously used Acronis to do very basic duplicate systems.

The solution is very easy to get set up and push out clients to our workstations for deployment. It is now used as our only solution to image and deploy workstations!

As with many platforms, the more you can put in, the better the solution will function. The time taken to deploy complex packages can be time-consuming, but this is outside of the KACE environment directly.

Licencing has been quite simple throughout. We have successfully expanded our support numerous times, including additional features and devices.

We did not previously evaluate other options.