We performed a comparison between Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac 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 tool is a stable product."
"Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, and Mac helps to ensure that everything is up to date."
"The solution is easy to implement."
"The website development section is the most valuable feature of the solution."
"We use the Systems Deployment appliance. It's our bread and butter. It is every machine that gets imaged here in this building and out through the whole state goes through the SDA. We rely on it completely. There is no manual process of getting a laptop out of a box, plugging it up, turning it on, and waiting for Windows to start. If you were to go to Best Buy and buy a brand new laptop, you spend the next two to three hours just setting it up. We don't do that. We get a laptop, plug it into the network, connect it to the SDA, and within about three clicks, we're done."
"KACE’s knowledge-based articles are very good."
"I am impressed by the service desk ticketing and asset management."
"The scripting part increases IT productivity because of the specialized software in our environments for students' courses. You need to use software which is not programmed by developers. A lot of software for building houses or other things is developed by normal guys, who do not have much skill in programming. When you need to install this type of software, it is very difficult. You have to install registry keys, etc. For that, it is very good to use the scripting part of this solution. So, you can automate this part as well."
"There is ease of use, and its pricing was a driving factor."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to have an overview of all devices that are accessing our environment."
"KACE has made our life much easier since we got off the Microsoft solution. The Microsoft solution was a lot harder to image over different ports and stuff. They would only have this one place where we could do all the imaging. Now, we have a whole building where we can image from. This means that we can image from our storage area, where we have a place to do our imaging. We can also image right at our desks, which is a lot easier."
"Asset management is most valuable. It is essential for all customers. The other features are also useful, but asset management is most important."
"The tool needs to improve its visual system."
"The better way to improve the solution is by working on an area where it lacks, which includes the migration part."
"The solution can be quite expensive, compared to other options on the market."
"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."
"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."
"I would sure like them to be able to copy and paste out of OneNote. That drives me nuts. You can't copy from OneNote into KACE."
"I would like for there to be improvement when it comes to Microsoft and Windows updates. It has the ability to do it but the control of it is not there like I have in the Windows Server Update Services. The way KACE does it is still very granular. You don't really see the process like it is in the Windows Server Update Services. I think that would be one of the biggest things that I would like to see KACE really put some work into and really make that a big enhancement."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
"Its dashboard needs improvement. Currently, there is no way to modify the dashboard. There should be more flexibility so that we can create views according to our use case."
"The K1000 doesn't communicate well with some clients without SMB. There are some issues with getting things to image correctly because they rely on SMB, and SMB is a protocol that is being removed due to security reasons. Organizations are trying to rely less and less on SMB. I know Quest is aware of it. They've talked about having a new version that wouldn't rely on SMB for connection to the clients, but they haven't gotten there yet."
"The labeling process should be more streamlined. It should be easier to do. It gets confusing at times."
More Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is ranked 15th in Patch Management with 4 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 6th in Patch Management with 38 reviews. Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is rated 9.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac writes "With good website development capabilities, the solution also provides exceptional stability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac is most compared with Ivanti Security Controls, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our Ivanti Patch for Linux, UNIX, Mac 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.