We performed a comparison between Automox and Microsoft Configuration Manager based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, HCLTech, Kaseya and others in Patch Management."It's easy to deploy agents to endpoints."
"They've been adding some new features lately, which I'm not nearly as familiar with, but the ability to just deploy patches and exempt certain machines from certain patches is helpful. For instance, for our servers, we may not want to roll out zero-day patches. We are able to exempt those and make sure that they don't get those policies. We've got certain servers that have to run a particular version of Java, and being able to exempt those servers from receiving Java updates is pretty fantastic."
"Its flexibility is most valuable."
"The biggest improvement to our organization involves the reduction in its man hours... We've probably saved hundreds of hours."
"Among the most valuable features are its ease of use and the Worklets. Both of them are time-savers. Worklets enable us to customize things for a given environment. It's something like when Apple lets other people create applications. Other peoples' Worklets can be used in our environment and in our customers' environments. That saves a lot of time, and it's really cool."
"Coming from prior solutions that were a lot more effort, Automox's patch management abilities are transformational. When I took over patching at my company, they were using on-premise architecture to patch. As the workforce shifted from being in the office into their home offices, I was able to lift and shift with no effort other than deploying the new agent out into the environment."
"It's super easy to use and we haven't found anything easier."
"Previously, we would run a report, scan it, and compare it. We were spending 15 to 30 minutes a month on each machine on this stuff because you would find stuff that wasn't up to date, then you had to fix it. This solution takes that time down to minutes. Automox saves us easily many hours a month."
"I have found the solution to be scalable. We have around 50,000 users using the solution."
"The scalability to deploy the package."
"The ability to make collections and deploy to them has been great."
"Microsoft Configuration Manager is integrated with other Microsoft products."
"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."
"I like a lot of the reporting capabilities and baseline configurations."
"This solution has made life easy with respect to patching, compliance, and OSD."
"The product is useful for patch management."
"Asset management would be a great feature to add to Automox. We would run easier scripts or more out of the box scripts that would help us in audits. \"
"They need to improve the automation features."
"We would like to see additional detailed reporting for Service providers like us. We had to build our own reports via their APIs to meet our needs."
"The biggest area they need to fix, without a doubt, is the ability to copy and sync profiles and worklets between all of the organizations you manage, and the ability to have top-level user access control across all of the companies that you manage."
"It should have integrated workstation access. So, there should be a remote desktop feature."
"As concerns the patching concepts, there's a bit of a learning curve in terms of working out how Automox wants you to work within the console, not only splitting up everything into groups, but then having the various policies assigned."
"The stability has come a long way from what it was like when it started and now it's really good."
"The only thing that we've ever truly wanted is an onsite repository. Currently, all updates are provided directly from the internet. So, if you have 1,000 devices, all 1,000 devices go directly out to the internet. We would love the option of being able to put the updates on local storage so that we're not consuming as much bandwidth. That is literally the only thing that we've ever wanted."
"I'm looking for a single solution for all discovery needs. It fulfills about 40% of the requirements, and I'd like to see the other 60% so that I don't have to keep doing this."
"It is not easy to get good technical support, especially at level one."
"The solution does not support remote devices so the CMG is still required."
"We'd like the solution to make it easier to manage remote users."
"The solution can be improved with the addition of a mobile device manager."
"I would like to see some improvements in WSUS and control of other, non-Microsoft, product updates."
"The analysis is something that can be integrated. Their report analysis can be improved a little bit due to the fact that most of the time complaints policies are saved by the admins. It's something that we need to look into and search for."
"Could do with some cosmetic improvements on the user interface."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Automox is ranked 11th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews. Automox is rated 8.8, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Automox writes "Monitors our devices irrespective of the location and the environment, allows us to exempt certain machines from certain patches, and has perfect patch management abilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". Automox is most compared with Microsoft Intune, BigFix, Tanium, NinjaOne and Qualys VMDR, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium.
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.