We performed a comparison between BigFix and GFI LanGuard 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."BigFix is incredibly fast and accurate in patching, reporting, and remediation."
"It is user-friendly."
"This has very much improved our organization by saving time to deploy thousands of endpoints to our customers."
"Patch management, because it very much improved the patch compliance and has the capability to manage Windows and non-Windows clients."
"We are able to use BigFix through API connections to automate and reduce resources and time. The product's been great for us. It's increased the security posture ten-fold and it's increased our visibility across our endpoints enormously."
"The most valuable feature of BigFix is the software deployment."
"The architecture for patching and the 100% correct reporting makes BigFix stand apart from other solutions."
"It has plugins development options, which are great."
"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 initial setup was easy."
"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"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 feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"I would like to see more integration with external data."
"In order to derive maximum benefit from BigFix, it is essential that we configure all of its features and implement them effectively. If the automation could be improved we would be able to mitigate the risks associated with zero-day threats."
"I would like to see more custom content."
"The solution should have some kind of a local caching methodology, where the patches can be taken locally into a localized relay server, and from there, the patch can be applied, so that there is not much usage of the network required."
"The only thing that I don't like about BigFix is that it does not support other devices such as printer firmware, router firmware, and things like that. I will be happy if I can control everything and get everything else in there, even if it is just a line item. They can do some enhancements to the Web UI. I am trying to get customers to be able to manage their environment by using Web UI, and it would be good if we can delete endpoints by using Web UI. We should also be able to generate Excel content or data tables from the Web UI without having to go to the console. It is small stuff, and it drives me crazy that I have to go to another console to do these things."
"The reporting structure could be a little more simplistic. Currently, it throws too many vulnerabilities. Some of them are not needed because they are only informational and limitations, and they are not of much help. It doesn't need to show us these things."
"I'd like to see better integration, with the different applications within BigFix. Instead of sometimes feeling like four or five different applications, they need to be integrated a little better within themselves."
"There is no support for patch management on SLES on IBM pSeries (only the Intel platform is supported)."
"The version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"GFI LanGuard has some technical limitations with machines."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"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 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."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
BigFix is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 91 reviews while GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GFI LanGuard writes "A scalable, competitively priced solution with a good ROI and easy setup process ". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Tanium, whereas GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Microsoft Configuration Manager and Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager. See our BigFix vs. GFI LanGuard 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.