We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Quest KACE Systems Management 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."I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"The most valuable features of GFI LanGuard are the vulnerability assessment, it provides us with substantial insight into what applications are running on the endpoint systems and what vulnerabilities are there in the running applications. The second would be the assets tracking. I'm able to see in the network whether my endpoint server is operating and if all the other IT equipment is running in the environment. Additionally, GFI LanGuard is not heavy on system resources. It gives a competitive advantage over others."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"The most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"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."
"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."
"There is ease of use, and its pricing was a driving factor."
"We can get the majority of what we need with this product and do not have to spend money on something else."
"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."
"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."
"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 most valuable feature is the ability to have an overview of all devices that are accessing our environment."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding asset tracking."
"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."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"The version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"The documentation on how to use this solution in a Linux environment is not clear, which is something that should be improved because it is complicated."
"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 initial setup was complex. It is a Linux-based virtual server, where the customer cannot get into the back-end, so you can only follow their prompts. Then, there are specific things that have to be done in their implementation and upgrade phases that have to be done in a certain order or steps. If you don't get those steps right, the system doesn't work. I think that either simplifying that process or providing really good step-by-step documentation would be helpful."
"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."
"The GUI needs some work. I love all that it can do, however, it can be just be so cluttered at times."
"We had issues with the tool's support. We are a Dutch firm and everything has to be in Dutch. We were not able to do the alerts. You were required to tweak them a lot to get them in the language that you preferred. The solution's support depended on the person that you got online. Sometimes, the response was fast and other times you needed to wait a long time. The support also depended on the levels of support that you had requested."
"My biggest complaint is that almost every time they send out a new version, it fixes something and breaks another. Something that wasn't working in the last version now works, but something else stops; or they'll remove some dashboard that I really found to be nice and replace it with something totally different that I could care less about."
"The labeling process should be more streamlined. It should be easier to do. It gets confusing at times."
"Scalability is my primary concern right now."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. 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 Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager and BigFix, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Quest KACE Systems Management 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.