Quest KACE Systems Management Appliance (SMA) Reviews

The KACE K1000 is primarily used for patching or pushing out software that needs to be pushed out. The KACE K2000, the deployment server, is primarily used to image new and older computers.

I should be updating the image at least once a month. The reason why I am taking so long right now is because we didn't have access to it through our VPN, and I am mostly working from home. They just opened it up so I could work with it from home, which is great.

We keep on updating Quest KACE because we really use it. The patching is maintained by a different person, and he is constantly updating the software all the time. I should be doing the same thing too, and that's on me. However, I get busy with the email server, people calling in, etc. From now on, I am going to take time slots and mark myself up busy, just so I can do it. It's a lot easier working on it from home than when I'm at work, because people walk up on you and ask you to do stuff, then lose what you were just doing.

We always do the asset management first, then we image the computer. After it is imaged, it gets all the updates that it needs through the other KACE (the patch management). It makes life a lot easier. 

The most valuable is being able to use one image for several different instances. Because we only put one to three images on those instances, it saves a lot of space.

It pretty much provides a single pane of glass with everything we need for endpoint management of all devices. We have several different ways that we do stuff, e.g., for remoting in, we use Bomgar, and for asset management, we use ServiceNow.

They could make the booting solution easier for different things, e.g., easier to insert drivers. They could make it easier to create a new image and put it onto the server. Those would be some nice solutions. They could make it so that somebody who has no knowledge at all can do it. That would be really nice. Because every time, until I get it memorized, I still need to go back to the training, the manual, or Google it to figure it out again. If they would make it a lot easier, to where a nine-year-old could do it, that would be really cool. If they made it easier, I could have more people managing the images on the server, instead of just one or two people.

On the patching, the Systems Management appliance, I noticed whenever there is something new that the vendor has to do, he always has to call KACE for help with it. That could be made easier.

We have been using Quest KACE for quite a few years, since 2014 or 2015.

I have never had to reboot it, except for when I have had to update the server. If it is having problems, and I have to troubleshoot, then I will need to reboot, but that is usually the image and has nothing to do with the server. The server is very stable. I have not once had to reboot because the server crashed.

We have four people who have been trained on both servers: 

• Two people are mostly working on the patching, KACE Systems Management. 
• Two people, including me, are mostly working on the Systems Deployment Appliance.

There are 10 people in my group using the server to image. In another department, there are another two users who know how to manage the server, but they don't mess with the server networking. They only manage their image that they have on there. When I put in a fresh, new image, I inform them, saying, "Hey, I have this new image tested. You are more than welcome to start using it so I can start deleting older images."

If they would make it easier and more intuitive, then it would be easier to show other people how to do it. Right now, I have to send them to training, which costs us a lot of money.

They have very good customer support and technical solutions. When I have a little issue, I call them and they fix it right away. I don't have to wait three or four weeks unless it is something out of their scope, then it takes longer. However, if it is in their scope, it gets fixed right away, for whatever I need. It is the same with the K1000. Whenever they need somebody, they have to call back that same day or the next day, depending on the urgency that we have placed on KACE.

Because I have so many different other jobs, I am still learning how to upload images, etc. I have to go over the classes, then listen how to do this and that. Instead of trying to call Quest every single time to do something, I try to just relearn it myself.

We used to use straight SCCM and found KACE way better because SCCM is all Microsoft. A lot of times Microsoft is not intuitive at all on third-party software, so you can only really update the Microsoft software. When we went from a SCCM to KACE, it was way easier because it's easier to update a software or even install a brand new software.

KACE has made our life much easier since we got off the Microsoft solution. The Microsoft solution was a lot harder to image over different ports and stuff. They would only have this one place where we could do all the imaging. Now, we have a whole building where we can image from. This means that we can image from our storage area, where we have a place to do our imaging. We can also image right at our desks, which is a lot easier. Once I get up to speed on updating the image and adding new software, then it will be so much easier for everybody else because the Microsoft solution always did the image in a weird way. They didn't have all the drivers for all the things that we have. With KACE, you can actually insert the drivers and make it work.

The SCCM solution for imaging was a nightmare. It wasn't a very good solution at all. With some of Microsoft items, we would need to just make a whole image of that model, which would take up more space on the server. With KACE, you just use one or two images. We have one department who uses this one model in all their trucks. They like it to be a certain exact way, where the icons and in the exact place with all the same this and that. For that one, we just make an image of that whole thing. Because we have the terabyte solution, it doesn't put a dent on the storage at all. With the terabyte solution, because we have that on the patching too, we don't have to think about whether we are using up too much space. I can go there once a month and clean up everything instead of having to be on top of it. It is just way better.

We still use SCCM for certain things that we have to do which need to be blanketed out and are easy enough solutions for them.

The initial setup was very complex. It took hours of training. We found out at the beginning that we did it backwards. We were supposed to do the KACE Systems Management first, then do the Systems Deployment Appliance. We did it backwards because we didn't know about KACE Systems Management. That made it a little harder.

I would like it if they could make it easier, not a million steps to do one thing. Because once you have the image on there, it is tested, and it works, then it's great. All you have to do is update the rest of the software, but just getting the image onto the machine and making sure it works, that is the hardest part.

The initial deployment took about a week or so. We deployed it, then we had to learn it.

I was the project manager on the deployment of the solution. I was involved in learning about it, getting a demo server going, purchasing it, and then deploying it once we purchased it. So, I have been involved from day one.

On a weekly basis, KACE saves us hours. On a monthly basis, it probably saves us a day or two. Because it is easier to use, patch, and manage than our previous solution, where I didn't even have the opportunity to be one of the people to manage it. Then, with KACE, we were able to switch it over to our service desk, divide KACE K1000 and KACE K2000, and cross-train, so we could have more people managing the servers.

Overall, the solution has increased our IT productivity as well as the other department's. Since they are using the solution, we bought them a license, which has increased their productivity immensely because they were doing everything from scratch with no imaging solution. They were just taking a brand new machine and setting it up, which just takes hours. Instead of the 45 minutes that it took to image a machine and run the patching and stuff (which may be another hour), which may take up to eight hours total to do a machine. Now, when you have all the software updated, it takes less time (45 minutes) because there is less patching to be done.

We need it, so we have to pay the price. It is what it is. If you need a gallon of milk, then you have to pay the price for it. You don't want to buy the cheap stuff. You want to buy the stuff that is organic and good for your body, which doesn't have all this other junk in it. You want it clean for your body. Quest has done that for our deployment and management systems.

We did other vendors, but we didn't like them. The other solutions were too complicated and some didn't have good enough security for our system, since our security is super tight.

We first heard of a KACE when Dell EMC owned it. Then, we got more information on it. When the person who was going to do the project management couldn't do it anymore, I asked if I could be the project manager on it. I pushed it right through.

KACE promised us stuff and have kept their promise. Microsoft promises us stuff, but they don't keep their promises.

It is a great service.

It is semi-easy to use once you have it in, but I always have to go over what I have already learned. Because after so long, if you're not doing it every day, you forget it. You have to keep relearning it.

My advice is to check it out. They are always willing to do a demo server, then you can check it out and work on it in a sandbox. 

For whoever gets trained, make sure they train somebody else along with them. They need to keep on top of it. Don't just let it sit there because it will break after a long time. The images get so old that they don't work anymore. You have to reimage it, etc. Just keep on top of it at least once a month and update everything. When a new software comes in, update that right away. You need the Management System, but install that first, then do the Systems Deployment Appliance. If somebody else is doing the Management System, keep in touch with them.

We have a system where every time there is a patch, then I get an email so I can know what patches to do, so I can update them on the deployment. Then, it doesn't have to wait for patches. That is the whole solution of doing it. You don't want to have to image something, then wait. If there is extra third-party software that you can't put on the server, then you could at least get that all installed and have it out the same day. With KACE, I have been able to image something and have it out to the customer the same day or next day, which is impressive when you are trying to serve out computers. People really are impressed when you just open a ticket and get it done.

I would give it a nine (out of 10) because it needs to be a little easier. It saves us so much time and the imaging part of it is really easy to use.

We use all of the SMA's functionality. We use it for inventory and for asset management. We don't really do file distribution because we use Desktop Authority Management Suite for that. We heavily use the scripting and we deploy updates using the security within. We also heavily use the support help desk section and the reporting.

We're on a legacy on-premises deployment. We're hoping to move to a cloud version in the not too distant future, but that's not on the schedule currently. Our on-premises KACE solution is a dedicated KACE SMA Appliance that was purchased from them. I don't even know if you can purchase that anymore, but it's kicking.

When it comes to the reporting for finance, it definitely helps a lot because we just run a report. It saves hours of trying to export workstation numbers out of Active Directory, and then create the Excel spreadsheets. With KACE you just run a report. I look at a couple things and, if the fields are blank I look at that, and it saves hours of time between me and finance.

It also provides us with a single pane of glass with everything we need for endpoint management of all devices. It's excellent. It enables us to analyze if there's a problematic piece of software and to upgrade it. I've even done custom fields within the software section so that it grabs the boot order from the BIOS, for example. That way, anybody needing to re-image a device can look and make sure that the boot order is correct in order for them to network-image the device. The inventory section is utilized by everyone who supports anything in IT.

It provides us with IT asset management, compliance, software asset management, and patch management. We don't use it for mobile device management. That combination of uses definitely makes it easier. For updating and configuring everything the way we need it in our environment, it's integral. It makes those processes really easy, for sure.

The help desk, first and foremost is the reason that we went to it, as well as the asset management. We have meta-reports for that, reports that we send to finance on the assets and where they are, throughout the organization. I would say those are the two big ones for the organization. We have 600 employees across the organization and everybody uses the help desk, at least.

On a personal level, the scripting and the reporting are extremely valuable to me as a systems administrator. When people are asking me questions about what devices are in management, or what devices have a certain version of a certain piece of software installed, it's super-easy for me to jump into the SQL reporting, send them the information, and have confidence that it's got some good information for them to utilize around the decisions that they're making.

The scripting and the software distribution make my life a lot easier too, because if, all of a sudden, Adobe has a vulnerability and we need to do a security patch, it makes it super-easy to do something like that, to update everything in our organization, all in one shot.

It's very easy to use. We've just been asked to create three new queues, because smaller departments within bigger departments want to use this product, due to its ease of use.

And the Systems Deployment Appliance is magical when it comes to automating deployment. Before we had KACE, we had a replication machine that would hold the master hard drive and five other hard drives, and we would manually image machines. With the deployment of KACE our lives are so much easier. Not only can we have multiple images, specific to end-users' uses, but we have a plethora of post-installation tasks to install or configure the system, tasks that can be re-used for each system. You just have one basic base image, and then you use the post-install tasks to customize everything else. It is amazing. We can send an image to 50 machines in our central operations, remotely. We don't even have to be at the same location.

I also utilize it after each Windows "patch Tuesday." I have a schedule that I have customized so that after each "patch Tuesday" it gets deployed to all of my servers. That way, I'm not manually patching my 100-plus servers. That is another amazing thing that I love about it.

I would sure like them to be able to copy and paste out of OneNote. That drives me nuts. You can't copy from OneNote into KACE. I've brought that up many times.

We've just had a major upgrade and I haven't had a chance to dig into things too much, as far as the improvements and the latest upgrades. So I can't really speak to what else might be missing.

There is a great resource for improvements that people would like to see, because Quest hosts a forum in IT Ninja where you can vote for features you'd like. When a lot of people vote on something, they roll it into their next update. There are so many good suggestions about things to add. One that I see right now is a Microsoft Outlook plug-in. There's always room for improvement, but the product that they have right now is so great, already, as it is.

I've been using Quest KACE Systems Management since I started with the company. I also used it at my previous job. The company has had KACE for about eight to 10 years. We started using SMA as a ticketing system six or seven years ago. We've been using it for quite a while and we have 26 queues throughout the organization.

It's very stable. In the 10 years, it's been down twice, and it was back up quickly. When we called support they were able to connect to it and it was fixed.

If there are any impacting outages, support is right on it. They're really good about that. I think I got locked out of the SDA for some unknown reason at one point, and support was right on it. I had it back up and going within the hour.

It supports a huge network for us and I would assume that that network has grown exponentially over the time that we've had it. There have been no implications as far as network use. It just works.

We really heavily utilize everything already. Moving to the cloud is probably the only thing that we can do differently, other than implementing the mobile device management or the file distribution. We have other solutions for those things. There isn't really anything else to expand or improve or to utilize within it because we really are using it all.

The support is good. Anytime we contact them they're always very helpful. The response time is good and they're knowledgeable.

Active Directory would have been the main solution for asset management. For a ticketing system, we used Track-It!, but it wasn't that good at all.

For the initial setups of service queues, and for setups of users, as well as for mail setup and the different control panel stuff, it's really straightforward. As far as setup of the appliance itself goes, it would be different than what we did because I believe it's mostly cloud-based appliances now, unless you're going specifically for on-premises. I don't even know if they're doing on-premises anymore.

I would guess—because I wasn't here when they stood it up—that we would have had support in setting it up because it is a KACE appliance.

When it comes to maintenance, I'm the only one required. I just did a major appliance upgrade and it may have taken half an hour. My colleague jumped in to make sure I didn't mess up any of her queues and we were good. It was done. It was super-easy.

Compared to the tools that I would have to use daily, it saves me hours every day. That is a huge return on investment, in and of itself. I'm sure that would be echoed throughout our company. Obviously, doing the reporting and the updates and all the rest of it, I'm a heavy user. I probably can't even put a number on how many hours are saved, hours that I would otherwise have to spend scripting and distributing some other way that just would not be as streamlined or easy. I script anything that has to be done more than a couple of times. That way, other teams don't have to come to me to ask the question. They don't have to try to manually fidget with things. They just run the script and it's fixed.

If you think of it in terms of time, and how it saves us hours every week, just for me and my colleague, as heavy users, a low estimate would be that it saves us eight hours each a month. That's 16 hours a month just between the two of us and we're just two of 600 people in the organization. That's a lot of money.

Even when it comes to the end-user in our organization who opens up a ticket, there is a difference between what they had to do before, when we used Track-It!, and before that when we used an email group, and what they have to do now. It has saved both the end-user, as well as the technician on the other side, a lot of time. They can respond to a ticket through Outlook. They can go through the ticket itself, they can add screenshots and attachments. It is very versatile for both sides. We're saving a lot of time with that.

The pricing and licensing are good. It's worth it. It's a core software on our system. Every single person uses KACE. Even for asset management, we have KACE Endpoint Management on each one of our devices as well. People use the help desk and we use it to track and deploy things. It's integral.

There are no costs in addition to their standard licensing fees.

We haven't had to evaluate anything else. It works great. We've got good support. The end users like it, the technicians like it. If you're happy with something, why go somewhere else?

They've got really good demos, so someone who is interested in it can watch a demo or use the trial version, and they'll know right away that it's something that they're going to like.

There is also a lot of really great, documented support throughout the IT Ninja community and KACE's own documentation. In both cases, there are all of the resources that a competent systems administrator could ever need to figure out how to do anything within SMA. Or they could ask somebody without even going to KACE's support, and that support, itself, is a whole other line of help.

The biggest lesson I've learned from using it is that it's really easy but its capabilities are totally customizable. There are tons of extra things you can dig in and do, once you get your feet wet. Once you've established yourself within the appliance, there are tons of ways that you can start utilizing it even more, such as the custom fields and the reporting, to save more time and create more efficiencies. It's a great tool for those sorts of things.

It's a great product. We really like using it. There are always improvements that can be made, but unless something doesn't work, everything that I do with it seems to be good.

I would give it a 10 out of 10 because I've never dealt with anything better in terms of the time it saves me and the ease in doing some of the things that I would otherwise have to spend a lot more time doing. I just really appreciate the system. I haven't come up against anything that I can't use it as a solution for, whether it's deploying imaging, managing, upgrading, or reporting. It's a powerhouse for me in my role. For what it offers me, it's a 10.

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.

We use K1000 as multiple ticket queues, as well as 1 queue setup as a KanBan project management type of setup.

We also have a custom queue (we're still setting it up) for our new hire/employee change/employee exit process (with over 50 custom ticket rules).

We use K1000 for our patch management of over 2000 workstations.

We also use K1000 for all (or most) software deployment and for purchase order tracking and some asset controls

It is definitely an all in one platform.

Patching is more accurate. The ticket system workflow is good.

It is nice to be able to see right on the home page how the patching went from the night before.

The software installs are better now that there is only one place to get the install from. This helps to maintain consistency of the software that is installed on our workstations.

The tracking down of assets that have gone offline has been nice with the ability to configure and set up custom weekly reports for devices that have not been seen in X days etc.

The patching and scripting are great. Both have helped to streamline and improve the workflow and the integrity of our workstations.

When vulnerabilities are exploited so much, it is nice to be able to quickly detect or deploy what is needed within our off-work hours or during work hours without a reboot.

Being able to create a custom install for a new piece of software and/or set them up as a managed install is nice to ensure that systems have the software that is needed for the user and their job duties.

The fact that there is so much that can be customized with K1000 is great, however, some lack real-world higher-level customization without having to get other(s) (professional services) involved (and the extra costs in general) would be ideal.

Paying for the product should come with full and extended training anytime it is needed.

I am not sure if our organization is just ahead of the pack on what we demand and or how we want to utilize the K1000, however, even if it takes a little bit of time, so far, we have always been able to figure out what we need and make it happen with the K1000.

I've used the solution for over four years.

Knock on wood, we have not had any major issues. The backups are easy to restore if there is an issue (just make sure they are set up and you keep them off-site).

No one wants or ever expects any of their servers to get corrupt, but it CAN happen..

If and when there are any issues.. ALWAYS make sure your backups are running as well as being stored off site.

We had to rebuild our k1000 VM 1 time and luckily we had a "good" backup that we were able to restore...

Other than needing to update our VM resources, it seems to scale very well.

Chat support is awesome, and if needed to elevate to full support, they usually get with you quickly. Although it seems we (my company) always discover strange issues with K1000, they are always there to help

Positive

For patching we used WSUS and we always had issues with the patches not being applied and or reboots happening - causing end users to lose data. etc.

The setup process was not good with the Dell people. We had horrible training and the setup was not right on a bunch of stuff. It took almost a year before the patching was working 100% due to the original setup not done correctly.

We originally purchased through a vendor (from what I can remember) and it was installed via a Dell trainer/remote software etc. 

I'm not sure about my ROI (my boss might know), however, I am sure it has paid for itself by now.

I would advise others to ensure you get the initial training when it is set up (we bought into KACE when Dell owned them). We did not get trained very well at all.

Make sure to know what all of you want, and ask questions.

We looked into a few other products. I do not remember which ones now.

K1000 just works - plain and simple.

We have several use cases for KACE and a lot of them are related to the helpdesk. For example, they provide assistance with modifying the helpdesk, client distribution, and maybe a tad bit in scripting on how to use it.

I've used the KACE tickets a lot.

This solution provides us with compliance management. We used it for security updates including Windows security, Dell, and other products. Another feature that we use is patch management. In fact, we patch other products all the time using KACE. I have Windows and Dell updates running bi-weekly, whereas other products are done weekly. Microsoft servers are an example of something that we regularly patch.

The combination of the features is important, although I'm just happy that it all works. It's fairly easy to use once you figure it out.

The system helps a lot when it comes to updating and configuring everything the way we need it to be in our environment. In particular, their support engineers are really good, although the system usually configures and updates mostly on its own. 

Price to using KACE, we were using emails. Now that we have a ticketing system, everything is monitored and everything is saved. For example, with the service desk portion, it's a lot easier to track because of the OSV files. They take up a lot of storage and as such, they get stored in archives. This means that it's hard to find those emails, so it's difficult to see what people said. Something we would look for is how we resolved an issue by following steps X, Y, and Z. This information is all available in the description of the ticket and by using KACE, we can find it easily. As far as the service desk operations go, this solution has been A one.

Using this solution saves us lots of time, especially when it comes to performing updates. We only have one on-premises server, and we have somebody that updates it, but prior to using KACE, there were lots of errors that would occur. For example, one update superseded another. Now, it is put on the automated run with a smart ticket and the server is always up to date. I estimate that we're saving at least 40 hours per month, based on the fact that we have 170 computers. It takes a long time to push all of the software updates to every one of them.

When we consider patching and software application updates, our productivity has increased by at least 80%. This has been major for us, especially with COVID and since people started working from home. It's been tougher to manage everybody but with KACE, it's made the job a lot easier. For example, the KACE agent looks at the client and it updates everything automatically.

The system gives us visibility with respect to whether a user is online, or the last time they were online. While online, it also gives us real-time status updates.

The only feature that we aren't using yet is asset management, and that is something that we are working on.

This solution is easy to use. None of it is very difficult, although I had to learn it from the ground up and it wasn't very easy when I first started with it. However, progressively, as I put in tickets and began using the service desk, the Quest help, and the technical support, they showed me how it works. Usually, after they showed me one time, I was able to understand what I needed to do. Eventually, it was really easy to use.

The inventory is really good, where it automatically updates catalogs. When I check on things, it's right there, and it even has zero-day patches. When you fine-tune it and set up the automation, it makes life much easier.

The patch management security is also A one.

It would be nice if the asset management capability was a little more intuitive.

The software asset management functionality is an area that needs to be improved. It could be more automated because when connections need to be made, such as when I connected Adobe and my malware remover, the process was pretty much manual.  For example, I have to tell it which and how many licenses we have, and I have to keep updating it. KACE has what they call Smart Labels and they are supposed to automatically detect things, but it seems that they don't detect anything. I put all of the information in, and it still won't do it. It makes you wonder why you're putting the information into the system in the first place.

I have not been able to connect to Active Directory, which is a ticket that I've had open for several months. It looks like the problem may be on our side. I've been working with the firewall team, which is a third-party vendor, and even their developers can't figure it out. Each vendor is pointing fingers at the other. I just want it to work.

I have been using Quest KACE Systems Management for approximately two years.

I like the stability a lot. It doesn't crash. We've had a few hiccups but it's definitely not worse than some of our vendors. The downtime is near 0%. Some of our vendors have a lot of downtime.

Scalability-wise, this product is great.

When we first implemented KACE, we had approximately 80 computers that we needed to install it on. We now have 170 computers.

We will continue to use this solution going forward. Every time we stage a computer, we make sure that we put KACE on it. Once we do that, we pretty much don't have to worry anymore. We're setting up more PCs and we're going to be hitting the 200 mark, probably at the end of the year. We have been hiring a lot of people and I expect it will continue.

There are three people who use KACE but I am the primary one. I'm the only person that makes changes and monitors the system regularly.

The technical support is pretty good but we still have cases pending. There is one case that we have had open for several months and I'm not the happiest about that, but for everything else, the assistance has been pretty spot on. It's hard to complain about the support.

Sometimes, I figure it out myself after opening a ticket but usually, they can get the job done. They are much more responsive than most vendors. I don't know if they have SLAs but if they do, then I would say that they're meeting them. They usually contact me either the day of, if it's early enough, or the next day, which is nice.

If I speak with any one of them, it doesn't matter. I've worked with multiple support engineers from KACE and they all seem to know what they're doing.

Usually, I have to contact them for the higher-level stuff. For example, I didn't know about how security certificates worked because I had never used one before.

The vendor has Premier support available, although we do not use it right now. We haven't looked into it yet but because we're growing and don't have enough IT people, Premier support might be ideal. For example, I have read that they help with VBS scripting, and I don't know it, so that would help me to learn it a little bit faster. Also, they save certain things for Premiere support. I had asked the service desk if I can change the category of a service ticket and they told me that I could, but it was a custom option. For that kind of thing, you need to have Premium support. I plan to call the vendor and get a quote for the service. That said, for everything that's not custom, they help a lot.

Overall, they're very proficient and they're very knowledgeable about the product.

We were using Datto RMM before, and KACE is much easier to use. I wasn't the most familiar with the old solution but with KACE, I can do things beyond monitoring. For example, I can do distributions or use security updates. With Datto, I basically used it to see what PC people were on.

Before I was hired, an IT company used to manage our infrastructure and they were the ones using Datto. We moved away from the IT company, which is why we switched.

We have not used any of the freeware products that are available or tried SCCM to achieve the same functionality.

It was definitely complex but that is because I'd never seen anything like it before. It wouldn't be a fair assessment to say that it was the most difficult thing, but it was a lot of information and I'd never used smart labels before. I was very confused at the beginning.

But, after I put in tickets, they did take the time to go back over it with me. After they showed me maybe once or twice, I understood what a smart label does. From that point on, it was very easy to create smart labels and automate the system.

It takes perhaps five minutes to install KACE on one computer. The longest part is pulling it down from the server. Once it's copied to the local machine, it only takes a minute or 90 seconds to install.

We completed the deployment in-house.

The pricing is great. It's billed annually and it's very reasonable.

My manager was already very familiar with this solution, which is why it was chosen. We didn't evaluate other options.

I have seen other monitoring tools that you use with a PC, where they are part of the assets. With this one, you have to run a custom script and you have to do a lot of custom stuff. When you do custom work, you have to pay more money, obviously. It means that there is an extra cost but other than that, it's pretty good.

KACE provides capabilities for mobile device management, although we don't use the feature. We also don't really use the monitoring system at this point.

My advice for anybody who is looking to implement KACE is that it's fairly easy to use and once you learn it, it's a very simple product. It's not simple in function, but the ease of use is there and you can very quickly learn what you need to do to get things done.

Also, if you know a little bit more about VBS, you get stuff done a lot quicker. 

Overall, it's a great product, I'm really happy with it, and I feel like it gets the job done.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for using this product is as a ticketing solution. 

This product made the job easy to do without having to go put hands on the machines.

I love the integration with Bomgar. It really helped a lot.

The way we were set up, we had multiple campuses across multiple counties. And even with just our downtown campus, you're looking at fifteen different buildings, a hundred different classrooms, and offices everywhere. So for us, the ability to push an image to a machine, wake that image up, and just blast a new image to a computer without even having to touch it, and then push the software to that machine. This just made things so much more convenient for us and so much more efficient than having to go find that machine, pull that machine out, take it back to the shop, and repair it from there.

Just having those tools made the job so much easier and so much more efficient. But they really just don't need the people that they used to have ten years ago.

The biggest problem we had with Quest KACE, with the K2000, imaging becomes a problem when you start to try to go beyond doing more than thirty or forty machines at a time. We initially tried to do that virtually and it just, it wouldn't work.

But that one physical appliance was enough to get us through and once we got the one K2000 physical appliance that was plenty to handle imaging whatever we needed. As far as the K1000, our original purchase was underpowered. We really didn't have the box we should have had for over three thousand nodes, but when it came time to upgrade that box, we got a box that was much more in tune to having over three thousand nodes on that system and it's been doing fantastic for almost three years now. We haven't had any problems.

Overall, the stability has been pretty good. We we were using the Quest KACE on the front end, and then we had a Samba share on the back end that we were using for storage for all of our imaging and for all of our software. There were some issues with how we were doing things on the Samba side versus how they were connecting that to the K box, so there was some issues, but it wasn't anything that was Quest KACE's problem and Quest KACE has done everything that could possibly do to help us work the bugs out. But ultimately it was mismanagement on our end of people not knowing what they were doing and how they were supposed to be administrating the box.

It was really just as simple as buying the licenses as we needed it. As far as man power goes when I first started there, there was four technicians doing roughly 3,300 machines.

They were always fantastic. We dealt mainly with one tech support representative, and he was always spot on. We had some issues early on that I guess they didn't anticipate, and we worked closely with Dell, when Dell owned it, to work out some bugs that were huge for Dell. And because we were early adapters, we were kind of like Beta testers for some things that they eventually got a chance to role out to everybody else.  At first, USB imaging didn't work and then we worked with tech support for a while to get that ironed out and once we got that taken care of, it all got rolled into a new update and then it worked. The tech support staff was just phenomenal.

When I first started at my office, everything was done through Novell. At that time, we didn't have the ease of pushing software and remoting into the devices as we did with Quest KACE.

We also used another solution that wasn't exactly secure - it was touted as a secure solution but there had been some issues. It had been hacked before. And we were starting to get into an area where we were having outside vendors ask us for access into our network, so that started to become a concern for us.

It was easy. The team of the company came in, and helped us set it up.

The initial implementation was through Dell. They were excellent.

If the professionals make a recommendation, consider it. Really, seriously, consider it, because there were some things we didn't do with Quest KACE that we should have, and it  really hurt us in the long run. Even going back as far as active directory, there was some things that we didn't do with active directory that we were told by Microsoft engineers that this is what you need to do with active directory. Six, seven years later, we're looking at a network of two hundred almost VLANs. So, implementation of KACE was fairly smooth for us. If we would have done things exactly the way they would have told us to, which would have included flattening the network, like the Microsoft engineer told us to do when we went to active directory, things would have been even more smooth. We wouldn't have problems with wake-on-LAN, we wouldn't have problems with our scripting, we wouldn't have had problems with our SAMBA share. It would have been so much easier down the road to listen to the professionals and do exactly what they suggested we do, but because we had people who thought they were smarter than the professionals, we had some pains with implementation.

Nothing against Microsoft, but everybody I talk to, who has ever dealt with Microsoft SCCM, has ever dealt with Quest KACE. And, in comparison, it's just more user friendly, easier to integrate and it's just such a more elegant solution. It may be more expensive, but you get what you pay for, you know?

We also looked at Spiceworks. A lot of people on our team liked it because it is a free product. They were still working on their whole footing, trying to get everything worked out with that. But with Quest KACE, t had so many other things to offer. You know, with the ability to include the K2000 and K3000, which interested us.

The only hiccups we had were some power issues, where the box was a little under-powered early on. But, as far as having instances of bugs, or anything like that, the box ran great, as long as we left everything alone.

With KACE, we have a good manager for computers. We have a good dashboard with software and computers. For example, if I don't know the status of a computer, like if I haven't turned one on in 90 days, KACE automatically identifies it and shows me that it hasn't been used recently. 

I find this helpful because usually, someone who needs a computer uses a different method (likely contacting another team), and KACE allows me to proactively address these situations. 

Additionally, KACE has a great "Reset Computers" feature. Everything syncs seamlessly at this point.

When we need to reset a computer, we open KACE, go to a specific section, and configure the new computer through KACE. During this process, we need the computer's serial number, which matches the one in KACE. 

When creating a new record in KACE, we enter the serial number, the desired name for the machine, the site location (e.g., Brazil, US, etc.), and other details. After entering all the information, we separate the names and initiate the formatting process. 

We select the image and configuration linked in KACE, connect the computer from the network, and proceed with the formatting. Once the computer finishes formatting, we have all the desired information readily available in the KACE dashboard.

I like the KACE software dashboard so much! It's convenient. I don't need to know technical details like file formats (PDF or whatever) for installation, even for applications like Adobe.

Here's how I use it: Let's say I have a license for Adobe and I need to install it on a computer named Julian. I simply open a case, enter the name of the application (Adobe), open the dashboard, and search for the computer named Julian. 

Once I select the computer, it shows up in the dashboard. Now, in the same case, I can open a large batch of software, select the application (Adobe Acrobat again), and choose the computer named Julian. 

KACE then deploys the application with minimal errors, usually within one or two minutes. Julian even receives a notification on their computer that the installation process has begun. It's fantastic!

Moreover, it helped so much streamline our IT asset management and inventory. Sometimes someone changes the computer assigned to someone else. For example, Juliano had a computer, and then Matos changed it to his own use. I wouldn't know about this change if it weren't for KACE. 

KACE automatically tracks this information and saves it for me, allowing me to call it up on the dashboard. For example, if I need to find Juliano's computer in the system, I don't need to search through endless spreadsheets. I just search for "Juliano" in KACE. KACE also lists other details like the last login user. 

So, if I see "Juliano" on KACE but a different user is logged in, that tells me something might be wrong. I find this functionality very helpful for IT asset management.

Easier integration would be beneficial.

I started using KACE in March 2022.

I would rate the stability a five out of ten. It is so bad to use on certain sites. 

For example, while it's efficient for specific tasks like deploying images on certain devices available in the US but not in Brazil, there are limitations when it comes to global usage. The lack of flexibility can be frustrating.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten. 

It is used in a global enterprise business. In Brazil, we operate as a third party, but in the United States and other regions like Mexico and Europe, particularly Germany, KACE is extensively used. 

So, our enterprise is vast, and multiple IT teams are involved.

I haven't had to use their technical support as I have internal resources for troubleshooting. However, when needed, there's a contact in Germany who assists with Quest products.

Spiceworks is simple, and we just we can integrate with the GPO. But all the best parts with Spiceworks are to download the documents with how many computers I have.  

The good part of KACE is that it can integrate with KACE, and we can manage the computers and the software. It offers remote access to know which users are on the computer. It is very fast.   

I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being easy. 

It was very easy to set up. We deployed it both on the cloud and the premises. 

We have a cluster with one patch on-premises and another patching in the cloud.

We use AWS. We use Azure for SharePoint, but not extensively. We also use some Azure for smaller deployments but primarily use VMware.

We didn't use a third-party integrator or reseller. We did it internally.

In our case, just myself and another user were enough for deployment. It is too expensive to involve more people in KACE management.

Two people are maintaining the product. 

It is expensive in Brazil.  Generally, it's considered expensive, especially compared to solutions like Spiceworks.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We primarily use this solution for the help desk, but we also utilize the scripting portion of it to automate things that would otherwise take us a long time to do manually. We're just now trying to start using the asset management portion of it as well, tying users to various equipment.

In addition to these things, we use some of the reporting and some of the file synchronization features.

An example of automation is pushing patches out to users. For example, I just finished creating a bunch of patch schedules.

All of the features that this product offers play an important role in our company.

We have a K1000 and it offers a single pane of glass for endpoint management. It would be nice to have a K2000 because it would then include image updates for hard drives, which our version does not. Otherwise, as far as endpoint management is concerned, it is complete.

We have utilized the IT assets but have been largely unsuccessful in using the modules for licensing and warranty.

When it comes to updating and configuring everything the way we need to have it done in our environment, it takes care of 90% of the work. It would be nice if it had a packager for software when we're dealing with executable files because not everything has a managed installer, unfortunately. It means that we have to trick it into doing what we need to do sometimes. For the most part, it does what we require.

The most valuable feature for us is the helpdesk. Just being in the IT industry in general, we have to have something to track what we're doing day in and day out, whether it be a project or end-user support. It helps us keep all that together in one place. The help desk is what everybody in our department uses it for the most.

The scripting is a very valuable feature, as it saves us time on pushing certain things out to the users, such as software and patches. The patches definitely need some help.

When you get to patch management, it's complicated. I have had to call technical support about it several times. The labels can get kind of confusing as well. I know that there are a lot of them and if I spend more time in it I'd probably understand it better, but anytime I have to create a label for something, I just get lost in a rabbit hole.

We tried the licensing a few times, but we never got it to work properly. It's always really buggy. It is a similar situation with the warranty information; it doesn't always pull that information accurately. It would be helpful to have those pieces addressed because we can't use them. It's been a few years since we touched it, so they may have been addressed by now, but every time we updated, we would go and test it and it just wasn't keeping track correctly.

The KACE Go Mobile App crashes a lot, and it always has. I would love to see that get fixed because it's very convenient when it does work properly, but most of the time it does not. This experience is uniform across multiple devices that we've tried over the years. I've read the reviews on the app store and all of the different messages being sent to the developers about how this needs to be fixed, and nothing ever happens. This is an area that could use some improvement, for sure.

It needs to have better Unix crontab options for patch management. We want to have the ability to use expressions because we would like to do our patches every two weeks. As it is now, with the way it's formatted, it won't allow us to do that. Essentially, we need more customization as far as the schedules are concerned.

We had a report where there were some custom fields in KACE, and we would be able to fill those out and utilize them for reporting. In one of the updates, those fields were removed. They were custom-built and they still exist in KACE, but from what I understood from the release notes and from speaking with a support rep, those fields are no longer available in reporting. Without being able to report them, it defeats the whole purpose of having fields there in the first place.

We are still able to do some customization in the reports, but the custom one, two, three, and four fields in the user details are in the appliance, but we can't find them on a table anywhere inside of the database.

Another thing that we would like is to have at least a limited degree of write permissions for the databases. It would make it a lot easier for reporting or even certain things that can't be exported, to have at least some kind of write control to the databases. I understand, as a company, why they don't want to give that ability to some people because of the can of worms that it opens, but it would just be really helpful to be able to automate some things, rather than have to go in and update the stuff field by field.

For example, the help desk configuration, where you have your categories and subcategories, and you can go in there and assign users. We have more than 100 of those line by line. Anytime we get a new help desk person or we make a change to who the owner is of a certain category, we have to go in there and manually set it, each and every one of them, and it takes hours to do.

Essentially, we would like to have more control over it and assume responsibility for problems should they occur. If we break something then it's our own fault.

Since we upgraded to version 10.0, all of our reports are broken. I haven't yet called in about that to find out what the problem is. At this point, we get a bunch of unknowns and question marks whenever we pull a KACE report off of our report server. It may not be a serious issue.

I have been using Quest KACE Systems Management for almost seven years. At the company, it has been in use since before I started.

The stability is great. We've only had it crash once, and that was because of a power outage. Otherwise, it's been awesome.

It used to be slow at some points, but over the years, through the updates, it's gotten a lot more responsive. There are still a few things here and there that take a little bit longer than I think they should to load, but it's not worth mentioning.

For the most part, this product grows with our needs. Back in the day, when we first got it, it was owned by Dell. All of our equipment is from Dell, including our servers and our laptops and computers, our workstations. It fits together very nicely.

All of our end-users use it, if they need to put in a help desk request. As far as the daily use of it, the ins and outs, I'm the administrator and I make sure that all the updates are done. I check on the patch schedules.

In IT, there are three of us. Aside from me, we have an IT admin that uses it to track his projects, as well as some tickets that get assigned to him for reporting requests.

On top of tracking these items, he uses some of the scripting functionality, when it's server-related. As an example, last week, he used it to handle changes that we had made regarding a print server. We changed our print server over to a new one, and he utilized scripting to remove the old server and add the new one. That's what he mainly uses it for.

Our IT director doesn't really use it for much of anything, other than his project-tracking and being able to look at everybody's queues, like mine and my IT admin's, just to see where we're at during the day in more of a supervisory role.

My experience with technical support goes back a long way and the service has changed over time. Overall, it's been a mix, based on luck of the draw. It depends on who I get on the phone. Some people know exactly what they're talking about, and some people don't, and we have to go through several emails or several phone calls just to try and figure it out.

Whenever you call in and you request a callback and the representatives say, "Okay, yes, we'll have a technician call you within the next couple of hours," it's about a 50/50 shot whether they actually call you back or not. Sometimes, they just send you an email instead of calling you. This can be a problem because I have all my emails filtered, so, if I'm looking for something important, I can get to it quicker. However, if I'm expecting a call from KACE support, I'm not going to be looking for that email. That's been a frustrating experience.

Over the years, it's gotten a little better, but it's still the same thing with the emails and the time it takes for them to get back to you. Or, if they just don't happen to be there the next day and somebody else has to take that ticket, that is another thing that can be frustrating. There is room for improvement there, as well.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

It was implemented before I arrived but I have been involved in the upgrade process ever since I joined the company. It is straightforward most of the time but there can be some complexity and it can vary. For example, getting the backups done can be complex, as can things be when changing from version to version. However, for the most part, it has been as easy as just pressing a button and doing an update.

I would say that overall, it is 75% straightforward.

The help desk is super simple to use and we saw our return on investment a long time ago, just in man hours alone.

We used to use a spreadsheet to track all of the things that came through IT, and that is cumbersome. It takes 20 times longer to do. You have to make sure that somebody else doesn't have the spreadsheet open. There are only so many ways that you can put in different columns and rows to get all the information you need, especially when you have to do updates. It was really clumsy the way it was done in Excel.

Another example of where it saves us time is with the scripting, whenever we have to do an update to our transportation management system. It is the biggest piece of software that we have, it's the most complex, and there's a lot of moving pieces to it. We used to actually have to go to each individual computer in the company, of which there are 100 or more, and manually update the different pieces. Now, we can do it with the click of a button in scripting, and then just go around to the few people that it may not have hit properly and manually do it there. It saves a lot of time.

We pay annually for technical support.

I looked at Spiceworks at one point just to see what their solution was like. We didn't fully implement it. Rather, I added a couple of computers on it. It was mostly for watching the network and I didn't evaluate it to the point where I could compare it with KACE.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this solution is to be ready for a lot to come at you at once because it does so many things. It's a blessing and a curse at the same time. Also, if you're going to go with a solution from KACE, I would suggest the K2000 rather than the K1000, just because it has more.

We do not plan on changing solutions anytime soon.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.