We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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."SCCM does everything from A to Z for a Windows operating system."
"Automation of operating system, application, and update deployments massively reduces IT operations effort."
"The most valuable features are Remote Connect, SUP, Cloud functionality, Report, Query, and third-party patching."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"The tool's most valuable features are easy patch management and software deployment."
"The major features of this product are the reporting tools. The most valuable features are package deployment and application deployment. Security management is also good because any vulnerability will be identified, and you can fix it. It's the best tool because you never know what kind of client you will have. For example, you may have your offices in low bandwidth remote areas. But it's achievable because it accommodates the bandwidth that you have available. Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is an excellent reporting tool for your environment. If you want to know the details about the hardware configuration, software configuration, what is causing a problem, or when a new feature update comes in for Windows, even that goes on SCCM itself. A lot of deployment stuff."
"It uses detailed descriptions of the workstations, and that is good for me."
"The most valuable feature of SCCM is the application distribution."
"It's a scalable product."
"The most valuable features are that it is included with Windows, and it can be driven by Group Policy Objects (GPOs)."
"The central points of managing product updates have been the tool's most valuable features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is easy to use."
"The solution has great potential and leaves the user with almost limitless possibilities. It is truly a product with a million uses."
"Provides the ability to create multiple downstream servers."
"The product is quite stable."
"The most valuable feature is Server Update's stability."
"Cloud-based improvements need to be better managed."
"One area of improvement is regarding the patching of Office 365 products. We have some difficulties on this side, and it can be improved."
"It is not easy to get good technical support, especially at level one."
"They need to improve the support for the Mac operating system."
"The time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved."
"Our company would prefer not rebooting computers while people are using them. There seems to be no strategy behind it."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could improve the integration."
"There is a reboot issue with the patching. Sometimes, if patching runs into any issue whatsoever, it doesn't reboot but it doesn't tell you it errored out. It just sits there and we don't find out until the next day whether it patched or not. That was a big issue for us. We're working through that. They added some stuff in there now where you can actually tell reboot is pending. But we still need some kind of notification that if something fails or is pending, we know. We shouldn't have to go in and look. They don't have anything for that right now."
"The only complex part was the solution’s tricky setup phase."
"Microsoft should improve their support for the product. A lot of guys are installing their products, especially Xero. If you have a real problem, though, it's quite difficult to find someone who you can support you."
"I would like to see support for other operating systems such as Linux."
"Having the ability to group updates by the operating systems would be very helpful."
"One area for potential improvement involves the administrative portal, where numerous options, including asset management and patch management, are integrated."
"The approval process must be improved."
"This solution's deployment could be improved. When I was the admin, there were some problems when deploying to clients. Sometimes the policy is not effective. I guess, more on the reliability side, more reliable means working more often with the clients. It could be easier to deploy."
"It would be good if it could deploy third-party patches or applications."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 40 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Microsoft Intune, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Quest KACE Systems Management, GFI LanGuard and Kaseya VSA. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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.