We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Patch Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"The initial setup was easy."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"This product is a great solution at a great price as long as it is only going to be used for a local area network."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"This solution has made life easy with respect to patching, compliance, and OSD."
"With the right administrator, application deployment can do wonders."
"It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in."
"Valuable features include configurations enforcement, compliance data gathering, and deployment of a standardized OS."
"The most valuable feature is the scalability."
"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."
"This solution helps us by automating the patching of our system."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"GFI LanGuard has some technical limitations with machines."
"The version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding asset tracking."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"GFI LanGuard could improve the rollback feature. If we have installed the wrong we have had some issues with the rollback function. Additionally, more input from GFI LanGuard for the custom software push install."
"The configuration of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could be improved, it is a bit complicated."
"One area of improvement is regarding the patching of Office 365 products. We have some difficulties on this side, and it can be improved."
"The solution can be improved with the addition of a mobile device manager."
"Initial setup was complex. There's a lot that goes into it."
"The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"On some hardware, we'd like an easier way to get peripherals attached."
"Regarding this, I'd like to mention the agent situation. When the agent on an end-user device is not functioning correctly, it can be quite problematic. It would be highly beneficial if there were a self-healing mechanism in place. Essentially, if the agent becomes corrupted or encounters issues, it should be able to rectify itself autonomously. This is particularly critical because, in order to utilize a tool like MECM (assuming you're referring to Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager), we need to deploy agents, known as AsMs, on all the devices we use, such as Windows 10 or Windows Server. Sometimes, when we deploy configurations or updates, they don't apply properly due to agent issues. This issue has been present since we began using MECM around 23 years ago. Unfortunately, there is currently no built-in mechanism for the agent to detect its own problems and initiate self-repair. Microsoft doesn’t have any feature to scan vulnerabilities and hence, they could include those."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of GFI LanGuard writes "A scalable, competitively priced solution with a good ROI and easy setup process ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager, BigFix and Kaseya VSA, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager report.
See our list of best Patch Management vendors.
We monitor all Patch 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.
