We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Red Hat Satellite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The ability to manage devices with different sets of policies is most valuable."
"Technical support, in general, has been quite helpful."
"There has been a noticeable increase in productivity for both my organization and clients."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"The tool's most valuable feature is Autopilot."
"It is a very helpful solution."
"The most valuable feature is probably mobile device management. Small businesses are coming under greater scrutiny and requirements for compliance as time goes on. We don't have to worry about a VPN because we can manage these devices, control company data, and lock users out. If needed, we can remotely wipe devices and deadman-switch them."
"Intune provides full endpoint visibility and IT control across device platforms. You can individualize it for your company with the Intune Company Portal app."
"The technical support is good."
"The ease of usability is the most valuable feature. It's user-friendly."
"With the SCCM inventory, we found a lot of rogue applications. We were able to identify them, find out who was running them, and either put them on our application list or remove them."
"Microsoft Configuration Manager gives different tools in one solution."
"It's a stable product."
"With the right administrator, application deployment can do wonders."
"The product is useful for patch management."
"What's valuable is the basic management of the systems, being able to control who can access the systems."
"The most valuable feature is the management of the distributed tool we use in the Red Hat Linux Servers."
"The product allows us to handle patching for multiple servers at a time manually."
"Technical support has been good."
"It plays a significant role in managing the lifecycle of our systems and ensures that we can effectively control and update the software versions to align with our organization's needs."
"The product helps me to manage a large number of servers from one console."
"The compliance auditing helped me a lot."
"The most valuable features of Red Hat Satellite are its support, simplicity, and patch management."
"You don't need to depend on any third party. It's a complete solution for patch and configuration management when integrated with the existing system."
"The scalability could be improved, and like most other MDM products, Intune is good but not 100% there yet."
"I'm still playing around with it and haven't had any issues with the product yet, but support can definitely be improved."
"It doesn't economize when you scale up. We have over 14,000 employees, and we have between 7,500 and 8,000 city-owned or personal devices being used to conduct city business. Its price can be improved. It is not a cheap solution."
"Integration with Mac devices requires some improvement."
"It would be better if I could integrate it with my core group policy. I would like to have a group policy in my current environment, which has strict control, but those things are still missing. Although it has maximum compliance and security, it's not available on-premise."
"The solution requires Mac support."
"In terms of what can be improved, I am looking for better enhancements regarding Apple management, not only on the mobile device, but also on the laptop."
"The closest Microsoft Intune can be to GPOs, the better. There needs to be more granularity on application deployments. However, they have done better recently with the application deployments."
"This solution should be simpler, and more consistent across modules/sections."
"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."
"I currently need to increase my compliance level in the patching processes which this solution could improve on."
"It is a bit of an old and outdated product."
"The solution is on-premises. The cloud version of the product, if a person needs to be on the cloud, would be InTune, which already exists as an option. SCCM doesn't need to offer cloud features for this reason."
"The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
"The database should be made to be more stable and robust, but not so much the configuration."
"I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. The licensing is a bit expensive."
"It wasn't easy in the beginning, and some effort was required to work it out. I already had the product documentation, but it was not well organized. It wasn't easy to follow. There were a lot of documents here and there."
"It is difficult to update and maintain."
"It should basically include a complete slew of system management and monitoring tools such as Nagios. It should be a single pane of glass that gives us a complete solution. It is a good solution, but it is missing a few important things. We're using Capsule for DMVs on other secured zones. Capsule is a part of Satellite to be a proxy of sorts."
"The product could have more diversity in what it is able to deploy and might do better if it was not dedicated to Red Hat products only."
"The dashboard of Satellite is not encouraging. It does not adequately showcase all the functionality it offers."
"I would like to see the scalability, user interface, and reporting features improved and for the solution to be simplified. Instead of having complex engineering, it should be simple for the user."
"I would like the direct integration with insights to be re-established."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 22 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Quest KACE Systems Management, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Chef. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Red Hat Satellite report.
See our list of best Configuration Management vendors.
We monitor all Configuration 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.