We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Microsoft Configuration Manager 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 initial setup was easy."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"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 most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The most valuable features in GFI LanGuard are patch management and vulnerability assessment."
"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."
"I like that the solution can block users from unnecessarily putting devices on the network."
"Valuable features include configurations enforcement, compliance data gathering, and deployment of a standardized OS."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"Offers good patching."
"It saves a lot of money when you can install things automatically and they are installed the exact same way on every computer."
"The most valuable features are Remote Connect, SUP, Cloud functionality, Report, Query, and third-party patching."
"One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined process has significantly improved our software distribution workflows."
"The ability to make collections and deploy to them has been great."
"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."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding asset tracking."
"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."
"When you want to uninstall software from an endpoint, sometimes it becomes very problematic."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"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 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 version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager could improve the integration."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"It would be of benefit if Configuration Manager could be connected/integrated with multiple Microsoft Intune subscriptions rather than just one (the current limit)."
"There's no way to say, "I want this maintenance window to be on the second Tuesday of the month." It's strict. This window is this and that's it. You can't fluctuate."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager can improve by allowing us to schedule the scripts, we don't have a script scheduling option and have to do it manually."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
"The deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"Regarding this, I'd like to mention the agent situation. When the agent on an end-user device is not functioning correctly, it can be quite problematic. It would be highly beneficial if there were a self-healing mechanism in place. Essentially, if the agent becomes corrupted or encounters issues, it should be able to rectify itself autonomously. This is particularly critical because, in order to utilize a tool like MECM (assuming you're referring to Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager), we need to deploy agents, known as AsMs, on all the devices we use, such as Windows 10 or Windows Server. Sometimes, when we deploy configurations or updates, they don't apply properly due to agent issues. This issue has been present since we began using MECM around 23 years ago. Unfortunately, there is currently no built-in mechanism for the agent to detect its own problems and initiate self-repair. Microsoft doesn’t have any feature to scan vulnerabilities and hence, they could include those."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 78 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2. 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 Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager, BigFix and Kaseya VSA, whereas Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Microsoft Configuration Manager 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.