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."It's helped us solve problems surrounding patching, installing, and reporting different patches, etc., on the virtual machines."
"The tool's most valuable features are easy patch management and software deployment."
"There is a faster time to rollout. If we get a new PC, it can be ready for productivity right away."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is valuable in keeping our systems updated. We are able to send updates to all the systems. Additionally, the Intune integration is helpful."
"The cloud account management is a valuable feature."
"The solution effectively handles inventory management, deployment, and reporting."
"SCCM does everything from A to Z for a Windows operating system."
"It has the ability to perform mass distribution."
"The solution has great potential and leaves the user with almost limitless possibilities. It is truly a product with a million uses."
"The solution gives authentic updates."
"Once we configure it and it keeps updating the patches, all I need to do is filter out which patches are required or not."
"The product provides a valuable Single Sign-On (SSO) integration feature within our IES environment, particularly with the IT directory and server systems."
"The most valuable feature is its ability to identify which updates are needed on a particular machine."
"It's a scalable product."
"With WSUS, you can automatically install and distribute Microsoft security patches without using an internet connection for all clients and servers. It is not difficult to understand how it works and I think it's a very nice tool."
"We can track the updates of the PC and servers."
"The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux."
"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."
"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 deployment process is lengthy and should be quicker to complete."
"Management of Linux devices could be improved."
"A lot of experience is needed in terms of troubleshooting, as this is one of the most difficult tasks in MECM. We were seven people in a group and I was the only one that had the patience to do the troubleshooting at times."
"The main thing is that SCCM has to become an appliance instead of a server. When I say appliance, it has to come preconfigured so that it is drop-shipped into the enterprise and then you activate the feature sets that you want. It should pull down all the latest binaries. Once that is all there, it should have a discovery tool which goes out and discovers the assets within an enterprise. If the server, workstation, and applications are all coming from the same vendor, why not have the vendor do this work for us and automate it as much as it possibly can?"
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"The database could be improved. In large environments, for example, we often get problems with reporting."
"The product needs to improve its user interface."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services could improve the ease of use."
"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."
"Some issues with scalability in larger organizations."
"Job management and control is an area that is in need of improvement."
"Setup is complex."
"The old backup files created by this solution use up a lot of storage, and this needs to be improved."
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 38 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, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Quest KACE Systems Management, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune and GFI LanGuard. 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.