We performed a comparison between Chef and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a stable solution."
"The most important thing for me is the autopilot feature."
"The most valuable features are the ones that make sure that the deployment is of a standard operating system and the Zero Touch deployment, which is very useful. This allows users to have an out of box experience."
"Maturity makes it a stable product."
"The Asset Management and Auto Pilot are valuable features."
"For Windows services, there are multiple options within Intune to modernize it to be more internet-facing and dynamic."
"For the price, the features included with Microsoft are appealing."
"There has been a noticeable increase in productivity for both my organization and clients."
"I wanted to monitor a hybrid cloud environment, one using AWS and Azure. If I have to provision/orchestrate between multiple cloud platforms, I can use Chef as a one-stop solution, to broker between those cloud platforms and orchestrate around them, rather than going directly into each of the cloud-vendors' consoles."
"Chef recipes are easy to write and move across different servers and environments."
"The scalability of the product is quite nice."
"The product is useful for automating processes."
"Automation is everything. Having so many servers in production, many of our processes won't work nor scale. So, we look for tools to help us automate the process, and Chef is one of them."
"You set it and forget it. You don't have to worry about the reliability or the deviations from any of the other configurations."
"It has been very easy to tie it into our build and deploy automation for production release work, etc. All the Chef pieces more or less run themselves."
"The most important thing is it can handle a 100,000 servers at the same time easily with no time constraints."
"The solution has a very good set of features."
"This solution helps us by automating the patching of our system."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is patch management."
"This has made the management of our environment easier."
"Valuable features include configurations enforcement, compliance data gathering, and deployment of a standardized OS."
"This solution has made life easy with respect to patching, compliance, and OSD."
"I have found the solution to be scalable. We have around 50,000 users using the solution."
"SCCM does everything from A to Z for a Windows operating system."
"There could be more wizard-driven policy development or creation. Some of the policies can get quite complex. If they have a wizard that assists the administrators in creating the policy, that will be a great job."
"The solution could improve by having better integration with Apple."
"We need the capabilities of the Cloud Management Gateway (CMG) to be enhanced through Intune instead of Azure."
"Intune has limited integration with non-Microsoft solutions."
"It would be good if, in addition to the minimal patching and compliance, we could also use Intune for application deployment. For instance, if a device is not patched, Intune should have the ability to push not only a Microsoft patch but also other patches, such as a browser patch."
"Regarding mobile devices, Intune is good, but there are other services that I would say are ahead of Intune from an administration and reporting point of view."
"When somebody has a customized application or their own company's application, we cannot deploy that application."
"The reporting and cost have room for improvement."
"I would like to see more security features for Chef and more automation."
"The AWS monitoring, AWS X-Ray, and some other features could be improved."
"Support and pricing for Chef could be improved."
"There appears to be no effort to fix the command line utility functionality, which is definitely broken, provides a false positive for a result when you perform the operation, and doesn't work."
"There is a slight barrier to entry if you are used to using Ansible, since it is Ruby-based."
"The solution could improve in managing role-based access. This would be helpful."
"Third-party innovations need improvement, and I would like to see more integration with other platforms."
"If they can improve their software to support Docker containers, it would be for the best."
"The TSM component could be improved."
"I would like to see more automation."
"In terms of the monitoring, the timeframe it takes to actually report back on the compliance of a device after it has been patched is a bit too long."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"SCCM should strive to enhance the accuracy of its reporting functions in order to avoid any issues with incorrect or inaccurate data."
"Our company would prefer not rebooting computers while people are using them. There seems to be no strategy behind it."
"Management of Linux devices could be improved."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Chef is ranked 16th in Configuration Management with 18 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews. Chef is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Chef writes "Useful for large infrastructure, reliable, but steep learning cureve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". Chef is most compared with Jenkins, AWS Systems Manager, Microsoft Azure DevOps, SaltStack and BigFix, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and AWS Systems Manager. See our Chef vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration Management reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
