We performed a comparison between ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus 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."The most valuable feature of this solution is centralized management."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The fetch repository is a good feature."
"ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus covers almost all my end devices, and I can easily look over my device's hardware status."
"ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is lightweight and has a remote push feature that helps me manage several main sites and subsites."
"It is a highly stable solution."
"The tool's most valuable feature is performance."
"Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"The most valuable feature of KACE is the mass package deployment. There are a lot of endpoint management solutions in the market. The way KACE responds is with the installation management feature, which is done in a very intelligent way, as well as scripting. It's wow. It's really wow. On top of that, there is a mass undeployment feature as well."
"We have our KACE agent deployed on all of our workstations and servers, and it provides us with reports on the hardware and software inventory for those."
"The software asset management has been a big help, even when it comes to license true-ups. I can use it to find out how many Tivoli we have, and boom, there's the number... And you can actually click on the information about the software and it shows, for example, that these five servers are where it's being reported. If you really want, you can log in to them and validate."
"I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time."
"The most valuable feature is the imaging of computers through the SDA... Being able to do that so quickly with the SDA, and to then use the SMA for reinstalling software, has been huge for our productivity."
"There is ease of use, and its pricing was a driving factor."
"Using this solution saves us lots of time, especially when it comes to performing updates."
"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 tool's support needs improvement."
"I find the user interface a little bit intimidating and not very appealing."
"The solution's UI is an area that requires improvement."
"The solution's initial setup is not straightforward, and we have to customize it with our relevant features."
"The cloud version should have option to add all the endpoints using the agent. Not only for Windows, but also the Linux version. There are some versions which are not compatible with SaaS Manager. So some customers do not want to use the latest version of Linux latest version of CentOS. Actually, CentOS is not available. But some are using and patch manager is compatible for some versions only, not older older versions. So there are some pros and cons that are referred to patch management."
"There are limitations to this solution when we are working with iOS, Apple laptops or desktops such as the Mac and iMac."
"The user interface of ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus needs to be made more user-friendly, simplified, and less complicated."
"The agent can be a bit more intelligent."
"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."
"We'd love to see support for larger dependencies in the scripting feature."
"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."
"Scalability is my primary concern right now."
"The problem is that it's harder to directly emulate a lot of the stuff that the group policies do, using the KACE solution. With regular group policies, you just specify the various settings you want to change on the workstations, and then you specify the workstations and—while it's kind of an ugly mess—it does it. Whereas on KACE, you really have to know what you're doing with scripting to effectively script those exact same changes."
"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."
"I think it should have the ability to have the applications automatically update. It would be really helpful if this would override what the user might choose to do."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
More ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is ranked 7th in Patch Management with 12 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is rated 8.4, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus writes "Good scalability and a responsive tech support team ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is most compared with Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix, Microsoft Configuration Manager, ManageEngine Endpoint Central and Automox, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Fortinet FortiClient. See our ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus 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.
