ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus Reviews

The tool's most valuable feature is performance. 

ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus needs to improve speed. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is scalable. 

We completed the deployment in two phases. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten. 

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

We use the solution for patching vulnerabilities. 

You can create remote sessions for client systems. 

The tool's support needs improvement. 

I have been using the product for more than three years. 

I rate ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus a nine out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is easy. It takes one to two hours. 

I rate the product an eight out of ten. 

On-premises

My company uses ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus to patch vulnerabilities like CVEs since it allows easy management of patches. We use the solution in our company to use Microsoft's Patch Tuesday.

The solution's importance at my workplace stems from the product's user interface being fairly easy to use. On the solution's dashboard, you can receive updates on the latest news related to patches. The solution also has a centralized console where, after the installation of agents, the product's users, admins, or managers access the centralized portal to look at the patching process.

The important feature for me and my company's customers stems from the solution's ability to provide automated patching after using the test and approve feature. The solution automates the patching process on a Monday or Tuesday, so you can schedule the patching process depending on the setting.

Products like Tenable or CrowdStrike offer a good and less complicated user interface. The user interface of ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus needs to be made more user-friendly, simplified, and less complicated.

For additional features in the solution, I would want the solution to provide me with a detailed view of each patch. If the solution could copy that information and show it on the console, instead of having to click on the plugin ID or the plugin name to redirect you to the patch and all its related information, the need to be redirected to another website to read all the information can be eliminated, and it would be great.

I have been using ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus for two months. Though my company does not have a partnership with ManageEngine, which is an area we are working on right now, my company does sell the solution to a few customers.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten since it also supports many operating systems and applications.

My company caters to the needs of its customer base, which includes banks, microfinance institutions, enterprise-sized companies, and mid-level-sized companies, like ISPs.

The solution's technical support is top-notch. Whenever I have a question, they get back to me immediately, which is probably one of the best features of the solution's technical support. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Though in my company, we currently work with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, we are also considering Ivanti Intune Patch Management.

I rate the initial setup phase an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult, and ten is very easy.

As per the law in Cambodia, the solution is deployed on an on-premises model. No solutions can be deployed on the cloud, but eventually, I hope we can move to the cloud. Some solutions are also deployed on hybrid cloud, but people mostly prefer on-premises as an option.

The time taken for the solution's deployment process depends on the environment and size of the company, but it can be done within 30 minutes on average.

For the deployment process, you need to find and study the patch and then scan the computer to decide which agent is installed on the system. Once the scan is completed, it will show the endpoints or computers where there are missing patches, then the solution also recommends patches before showing you which patches are applicable, and then it shows you which patches are critical, low, medium, or high, after which you can go through the process of test and approve. After the test and approve process, you can go ahead and install the patches and deploy those patches to your computers. You would also have to add policies, and though it has existing policies, you can also create custom policies for the deployment. For example, you can choose between a policy to deploy the solution now or deploy after business hours, which is a big process in the final deployment process.

I rate the product price a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price. It is an affordable solution for patch management. Regarding licensing costs, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus charges up to fifty endpoints to start with, which comes to around 600 USD. The licensing costs of the solution can vary since ManageEngine offers different packages. It is better to opt for the yearly package offered by ManageEngine, which will be around 3,000 to 4,000 USD, depending on the company's size.

My recommendation to those planning to use the solution would be to contact ManageEngine's sales team and support team since they are very responsive by nature. If you have any concerns related to the product, you can send queries to the solution's sales or support team, and they will get back to you since they are very fast to respond.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

We use ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus because our SOC uses Insight VM, which discovers vulnerabilities and the need for patches. However, Insight VM is not a patching tool, so we need another tool to make the corrections for our customers.

We use ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus for patching to support our SOC operations. It is valued for its role in addressing the vulnerabilities discovered by Insight VM. However, I don't have direct experience to fully evaluate its features myself.

The pricing for ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus is reasonable. There is a concern regarding the exchange rate as one dollar equals six reais today, making everything expensive in dollars for us.

We are also considering NinjaOne, which seems to have a better learning curve and a more user-friendly interface, and N-central.

The commercial aspect of ManageEngine is challenging due to their lack of presence in Brazil, which makes obtaining proposals difficult. I would rate them between three and five for commercial experience.

The usage primarily depends on the customer requirements and we deploy it accordingly. 

The fetch repository is a good feature. 

The cloud version should have the option to add all the endpoints using the agent. Not only for Windows but also the Linux version. There are some versions that are not compatible with SaaS Manager. Some customers do not want to use the latest version of the latest Linux version of CentOS. 

I have been using ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus for four years. 

The solution is highly stable. I rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable product. We have five hundred users using the solution. I rate the scalability a nine out of ten. 

The initial setup is straightforward. 

Patch Manager is cost-effective. 

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. 

The solution is basically for patching systems. Instead of patching using SCCM, that's Microsoft's System Center Configuration Manager, we used ManageEngine. The product has agents installed on workstations. Those agents communicate within a central server and pull patches and installs them on the workstations. It's pretty straightforward.

It's easier for us to measure patch compliance now than it was before. That saves us time and guesswork.

The ability to deploy patches seamlessly is the solution's most valuable aspect. It allows us to not only deploy patches but to monitor the deployment of those patches.

It eases the process of patch deployment, and it allows us to easily know what patches are available. We're able to manage our path cycles properly to let us know which systems require a reboot. In some instances, we will know if there is enough storage on the system. The solution also does patching for third-party applications, like an Apache Server. It picks it up and lets you know if there is a patch available for the Apache Server or SQL Server. It's not just OS packages. It also does application packages as well. It's very robust.

The ability to do out of network patching needs to be added to the solution. For example, a lot of people are working from home now. It will take a lot of strength to make sure the patches are applied since the machines aren't technically within our network. If there's a way one can ensure that endpoints outside the corporate environment can be reached and accessed for patching, that would be ideal.

The agent can be a bit more intelligent.

I've been working with the solution for just over a year now.

It's very stable. We have no issue with the cost to build it or to install it and start using it. We have more servers than workstations. 

The solution scales fine. However, it's license based, so once you reach your limit, it will prompt you to procure an extra license for more endpoints. Apart from that, it's pretty scalable.

You also need to have some storage to temporarily hold the downloaded patches, maybe about 500GB depending on the size of the organization. Apart from that, resource utilization isn't so intensive.

We have about seven people using the solution in our company. They are from the security team and from the server admin.

Technical support, so far, has been very responsive. We had an issue once related to adding indexes to patch agents outside of the organization's network. That was the last discussion we had with them. We Just needed some clarifications on how the head server works and what we needed to do to set it up. They were great. We were satisfied with their level of service.

We were previously using Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager, SCCM. It wasn't giving us the kind of reporting we needed. Then the deployment of patches weren't very effective. We needed something else that we could rely on.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It was very straightforward. 

Deployment took just over a week. Within three or four days we were up and running. The server itself took about two or three days to implement. Two days were spent actually setting up the server. After that, we just had to install and configure everything. Then we deployed agents to workstations and that took about three, four days. It was a week or so in total, from beginning to end.

About five people were involved in the deployment process, including support from the local team. Three people, who were server administrators, from my organization and two people from the local support team were involved.

There aren't really extra costs involved beyond licensing. 

We're just customers. We aren't resellers or consultants.

I don't know what the exact version of the solution we are using is, however it is the latest one.

The solution is definitely something a company should try. It's a better alternative to the traditional SCCM. Compared to other security products, it's not expensive.

It's a great solution. It works quite well.

I would give it a rating of eight out of ten. It does what it mentions it will do and it does very well.

On-premises

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients. We also use it within our own organization.

This solution handles our asset management, patch manage, and mobile device management.

The most valuable features are patch management and mobile device management.

This solution allows us to schedule reports, which works well.

This product integrates well with other solutions.

Automation with this tool is easy to do.

I find the user interface a little bit intimidating and not very appealing. This is something that should be improved.

I have been using ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus for two months.

This is a stable solution.

The scalability is very good. Increasing the count is just a matter of purchasing extra licenses for it.

Technical support is good. Even if you contact them by email, you will receive a reply within one or two hours.

We did not work with a similar solution prior to using ManageEngine.

I did not complete the installation but from what I understand, the initial setup is straightforward and easy to do. It involves installation on the server, as well as the endpoints. It takes approximately one day to do.

The price of this product is reasonable.

At this point, this product satisfies our requirements.

I would recommend this product, although it depends on the requirements. It can be integrated with a lot of other products, too. Ultimately, it depends on how it is that they want to manage their assets.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

On-premises

Our primary use case for this solution is patching end-user systems. These can be mobile devices, PCs, desktops, or laptops.

We have been using the patch management component for the past six months, but we have been using more components within ManageEngine for about a year and a half.

We have an on-premises deployment.

The most valuable feature of this solution is centralized management.

It is very easy to use. It requires only a few clicks to download the latest patches and forward them to the endpoints.

This solution supports multiple operating systems and multiple hardware vendors.

There are limitations to this solution when we are working with iOS, Apple laptops or desktops such as the Mac and iMac. All of the features are working with Windows, so they should be working for Mac as well.

We need a better ability to communicate with the end-users using the solution.

The support for this solution needs to be improved. 

We have been using this solution for about six months.

This solution is pretty stable.

We use this solution once a day to check to see what packages need to be done. The updates do not happen very frequently.

This is a scalable solution.

Prior to this solution, we used SCCM. We switched because it is very limited to Windows, and for Windows users. Because we also have Mac computers on-site, we need a solution that handles these also.

The deployment took approximately one week.

Two people were involved in the deployment, and we have one administrator who takes care of maintenance.

The end-users need to set up their file-sharing properly, so sometimes we have issues with that before we set it up. It has to be done manually.

We had a third party to assist us with the implementation.

The ROI for this solution is good.

Our licensing fees are on a yearly basis, and the charge for support is extra.

We evaluated Ivanti SCCM before choosing this solution.

For anybody researching this type of solution, if you need one product for Windows, Mac, and Linux, then this is the best choice.

This solution is very easy to use, and very easy to do the patching. It is important, however, to have it fully compatible with the Mac.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.