Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

The on-premises useability is very good.

The solution is stable. 

For the most part, for our needs, the scaling is fine.

Microsoft is already pushing users towards Intune, as opposed to SCCM. It's on the roadmap for them. It's inevitable. SCCM will be on Endpoint Manager in the future. I would say nothing needs to be changed.

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.

We have used the solution for the past decade. It's been around ten years at this point.

The solution is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

SCCM is built for corporate networks. There is some advantage from Microsoft in terms of the content management gateway that we already have so that we can utilize the internet, however, scaling is fairly it's straightforward.

In our company, we have 44,000 devices. We do not need more. Scalability-wise we are good. We are not a company of hundred thousand devices. I'm not looking to scale it more. Therefore, I can't speak to what scalability would be like for those with 100,000 or more devices.

We have a support team that does technical support for us. I don't work directly with Microsoft. I go into priority calls, however, our technical teams manage that. Therefore, I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are.

We are trying to transition from SCCM to Bigfix.

My understanding is that the installation is a two-day setup, however, I did not personally set it up, and therefore can't speak of the implementation or how easy or difficult it might have been.

I cannot speak on pricing. I let the procurement team deal with it. Therefore, I don't have any information on licensing fees, et cetera.

I have looked at comparisons between Bigfix, SCCM, and Intune. I personally prefer INTune as a solution, however, the company is moving towards Bigfix and away from SCCM.

We are just customers and end-users of SCCM.

We have been using SCCM for the past decade, however, now, the company is supposed to go with Intune for model management. However, we have a new CPO or CSO double hatting with security as well. He's more inclined in Bigfix features, which offer more robust patch management as well as vulnerability scan. SWe dropped the plan to go with Intune and will go with Bigfix, moving us away from SCCM.

Our CPO, CSO is mainly the driver for the change, not because it is on our roadmap or our partnership with the vendor or anybody else.

In general, I would recommend the solution to other organizations and companies. We've been happy with it over the years. I'd rate it at a nine out of ten.

I am using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for software distribution and patch management.

The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the software deployment. Additionally, Microsoft integrates most of the other solutions well with one another.

The support could improve.

I have used Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately five years.

We are utilizing the solution on a regular basis.

I rate the scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager 

The availability of technical support could improve.

I rate the support from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager as seven out of ten. 

Neutral

I rate the initial setup of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

I rate the price of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is the application and device management for any windows desktop and mobile device clients.

The most valuable feature is the restriction of data transfer between unmanaged applications and managed applications, specifically on mobile devices. For example, if a user wants to transfer data from email to WhatsApp, that can be restricted.

The solution can be improved by speeding up the synchronizing of the policies on the devices. Technical support can benefit from shortened response times and making sure all of the support team are at par with their knowledge regarding the solution.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable. We currently have seven to nine thousand users.

The solution is scalable to match our needs.

The technical support team's response time can be slow at times and some people are more knowledgeable than others depending on who you have assigned to the ticket.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward. I give it an eight out of ten for ease.

The price is competitive and reasonable. I would give the solution an eight out of ten on price.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

The solution doesn't require any maintenance from our end because it is a cloud-based solution and Microsoft takes care of everything. 

The solution is easy to integrate with the durations and application, and administration is also very simple. When you go with the combination of licenses, the cost is also good, and reasonable.

Microsoft has done a good job with authentication solutions, such as single sign-on, or open authentication.

The downside of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's an on-premise-based solution. With the pandemic coming on board the need to support users across the globe has increased. For a while, we would use the in-built Microsoft Teams screen sharing feature but the disadvantage of that is you cannot perform privileged access. Microsoft does not give you access to that. That's where you need cloud-based tools, such as BeyondTrust or Freshservice.

There are many aspects of this solution that can be improved, such as security.

The integration could be better with other software packages.

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately three years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is a stable solution.

Having Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager available only on on-premise creates limitations. If you want the best scalability options then you will have to move to the cloud to a solution such as Microsoft Intune.

We have approximately 1,000 active endpoints using this solution.

Microsoft has a lot of support available for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. When we open a support ticket Microsoft solves them in the set out the time frame in the SLA.

We were using other solutions previously.

The installation is not easy. As with most on-premise solutions, they are not easy to install. Microsoft documentation is complicated and goes on and on. It's a lot to try to assimilate the information. With a cloud solution, it makes it a bit easier. However, even with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager being on-premise with Intune, it's still not straightforward. The time the implementation took for us to complete was a couple of weeks with a five-person team.

In recent times, a lot of companies have begun to move away from Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager. The endpoint configuration is very convoluted to implement. In most companies, you need to have a very large dedicated team to manage the solution on the back end. 

A lot of companies are looking to cost savings. With the advent of cloud solutions, companies have the opportunity to receive a lot of cost savings. There are a lot of ITSM tools that will do asset management for you, change management, converged asset management, and updates. There are other ways to configure updates and deployment. The solution is a bit convoluted and expensive.

The price of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is expensive.

I have a very good idea of what my present workplace pays for this solution because it's usually a mixture of different solutions. For example, if you have an Azure P2 license, it tends to cover Microsoft 365 E5. We have a number of licenses. 

The licensing is typically paid monthly or annually as part of the agreement by the customer.

I would recommend this solution to others if you're an Azure-centric organization. If you have your workloads on Azure and are a Microsoft-based organization. For example, you have Microsoft servers, Microsoft endpoints, Azure workloads, BD VMs, Data Factory, and SQL.

I would advise others to use online help forums instead of Microsoft documentation because they can tend to be complicated and lengthy.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

Microsoft is working on migrating the function of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager to the cloud. Every week and every month there is something new that's happening to move to the cloud.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is used for installing new workstations without the interaction of people, it does the deploying of workstations automatically. Autopilot is used for automatic deployment installations of workstations without IT support. We only have packages at home and we do not need a VPN to configure workstations from home.

The patching of inventory to patching of Windows and applications, such as Office, inventory of wiping security, deploying new software, reinstalling software, uninstalling software, and wiping the device. This is insecurity from Active Directory services, some functionality we are moving to a group policy.  By having less IT support you can handle more workstations.

The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed.

I have used Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager within the last 12 months.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is a stable solution. We do not have a lack of production in my orgaization.

The solution is highly scalable.

We have two IT engineers using the solution.

Microsoft has high-level support, I only have good words to say about them.

I have used Zabbix previously. I was using Zabbix, its free tool. It's not for somebody who does not have knowledge of Linux. Zabbix is not for a regular Microsoft user to use.

The installation requires a lot of knowledge and experience. The whole process took us three months.

The license price could be reduced for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager  They should make the price more affordable for smaller companies, most companies would be able to use the solution if it was priced better.  There are more people on this cloud because you don't have to have either a server room or an on-premise server. You can have one IT person handle this without any local infrastructure. 

You receive a license for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager when you buy an EMS E3 license. 

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

We use it and our clients use it for device patch management, servers, and management processes.

We deploy it for clients but we don't usually maintain it for them.

The best thing about SCCM is the patch management. You can make sure that all of your devices are there. You can see all of them and see your levels.

It lets you know what your infrastructure is like and what state you are in.

SCCM internally works great. On your internal infrastructure, it is fantastic. It gives you everything you want it to do.

Because of the way SCCM is, we are moving to the Intune platform similarly to the way that everybody else is. Microsoft is slowly migrating SCCM to the new Intune product for management.

There are so many issues with SCCM, but they are already working on migrating the desktop to the intune platform. They have already improved the management and the patch management. They are also looking at cloud integration and being able to deploy it in Azure properly and run the Azure infrastructure.

The main or legacy issue is not being able to do remote management of devices without being on a VPN to get their updates. It didn't work well on non-corporate networks. This has been resolved by the new Intune platform.

It's Microsoft, they have their issues, but they are getting better. They are integrating it with their office products, and their platforms.

In the next releases, I would like to see them make it easier to do remote sessions into the boxes.

It would be nice to have everything in one place. Now they have Intune for the desktops and SCCM to handle their servers.

I have been using SCCM for ten years.

We were using some of the older versions.

The stability is only as good as your infrastructure.

The scalability of SCCM is good but now that it is on the intune platform, it's even better.

The usage and how extensively it is being used depends on the client and the client's roadmap.

As gold partners, you have a direct line to Microsoft technical staff. It is easy for us to get support.

Our experience with the support is a positive one.

I have been using Zabbix for ten years. I have deployed it in my infrastructure.

I have integrated it with Grafana.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

Depending on the customer and their infrastructure, it could be easy. If it is a small infrastructure the installation could be quite quick. You could fire up SCCM, sent the probes, let them detect it, and put it in. 

For large infrastructures or complex networks, it can be more difficult. It can take as long as a day to get it all set up and running or it could even take a week.

One of the joys of SCCM is that one person could easily maintain it but we have two people from the service desk.

They are always changing their price model, which I don't like. It would be better if they didn't keep adjusting their price model.

The price model is different for every client. It depends on the corporation, the company's subscription balance, and how many machines they have. For us, it fluctuates. 

Some clients have a smaller infrastructure, and for those with large infrastructures, it will cost them more. Others will also have multiple versions of it for backup and failovers.

I was looking for a comparison to see if I want to propose them to some of my clients.

If you are implementing from new, go with Intune directly, don't use the on-premises version.

With the transitioning state to the cloud versions, I would rate SCCM a seven out of ten.

They have handled desktops very well but they haven't transitioned servers very well.

I like its ease of use. It does what you need it to do, and it's a one-stop-shop for the company and for all your deployments. If you incorporate Intune into it, you can have both. You can bring your own devices and corporate devices, and everything runs out of SCCM and Intune.

They should improve their anti-malware policies like the SCEP policies. For instance, you can't have different policies for different servers, there is only one policy in all the servers, and everything is covered under that. 

For example, say you want to scan one group of servers on Saturday, and then you want to scan another group of servers on Sunday, you can't do that. You have to scan all your servers, a regular scan or a full scan, on the same day and at the same time. That's definitely one thing they need to resolve. 

In the next release, it would actually be nice if they included Apple products. It will also help if you can use Intune again. Their compliance reporting feature could also be better. They can maybe work a bit on that for patching now.

It would be better if SCCM came with the functions of Right Click Tools built-in. If SCCM would have all those functions already built-in, we won't have to go and spend $5,000, just as an add-in from another company to get those functions.

I have been dealing with SCCM for nine years.

I used to be the SCCM administrator for quite a big company that had 80,000 people. That's pretty much all I did all day, every day.

BigFix is the poor man's SCCM. It's for people that can't afford SCCM and for small and medium-sized businesses. There's nothing else out there that can do what it can do.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SCCM a nine.

We are using it for software deployment. Our network team uses this solution. It is mostly our tier-two team. 

We're on the latest version.

Software deployment and WSUS are most valuable.

There should probably be better remote support. They should also continue to improve on patch management, patching, and creating or turning products in software into deployable apps.

We have been using this solution in our organization for ten years.

The version that we have is MEMCM, and it works fine.

I've had interaction with Microsoft support, and their support is fine. It is what it is. It is always nice if it is better, but I certainly don't have any complaints.

I don't look at it from an ROI perspective. It provides what we need. It is a critical piece of infrastructure. If you want to run networking and support devices, you have no choice. You have to have it.

I would rate SCCM a nine out of ten.