Microsoft Configuration Manager Reviews

Microsoft Configuration Manager serves as our primary tool for endpoint management and software deployment across the enterprise level. On a day-to-day basis, we typically use it for software deployment, patch management, operating system OSD, hardware and software inventory, and compliance configuration manager.

Recently, I handled a task deploying a critical software update to over 2,000 workstations. Using Microsoft Configuration Manager, I created a deployment package, targeted the relevant device collection, and monitored the rollout in real time. The automated reporting in Microsoft Configuration Manager allowed me to identify devices where the deployment failed and take corrective action quickly. On the endpoint management side, I regularly use Microsoft Configuration Manager to enforce configuration baselines, deploy secure security patches, and ensure devices comply with corporate policies. For example, we standardized all laptops with a set of required security configurations and Microsoft Configuration Manager helped verify compliance across all endpoints. Overall, Microsoft Configuration Manager allows us to manage endpoints efficiently at scale, automate repetitive tasks, and maintain visibility into the health and compliance of all devices.

One unique aspect of how we use Microsoft Configuration Manager in our organization is how we combine it with Microsoft Intune to manage both on-premises and remote endpoints in a hybrid environment. While Microsoft Configuration Manager handles the majority of our on-premises devices, Intune manages our remote and mobile devices. This hybrid setup allows us to manage both on-premises and remote endpoints efficiently. Custom collections and automated compliance reporting help target deployments and maintain strong security standards across the organization.

In my experience, the best features of Microsoft Configuration Manager are software deployments and updates, OSD, hardware and software inventory, compliance and configuration baseline, reporting and monitoring, and integration with Intune hybrid management. These features make endpoint management efficient and scalable.

The feature I rely on the most day-to-day is software deployment and patch management. It keeps endpoints updated and secure with minimal manual effort. Inventory and compliance monitoring are also important, but daily deployments are critical.

Microsoft Configuration Manager has had a significant positive impact on our organization in several ways: improved efficiency, enhanced security and compliance, standardization, scalability, and visibility reporting. Overall, Microsoft Configuration Manager has helped us save time, reduce risk, improve operational efficiency, and maintain strong control over our endpoints.

One of the biggest impacts Microsoft Configuration Manager has had on efficiency is the reduced manual work for software deployment and patching. For example, deploying a new application or security updates to hundreds or thousands of devices previously required several days of manual effort, including running scripts, checking devices individually, and validating installation. With Microsoft Configuration Manager, these tasks are automated and managed, allowing deployments to complete in hours rather than days. We also have automated reporting for deployment success and compliance which saved the IT team significant time that used to be spent gathering and reconciling inventory data from multiple tools.

Overall, Microsoft Configuration Manager is a powerful and reliable platform. However, there are a few areas where it could be improved: user interface and usability, cloud and remote device management, reporting analysis analytics, performance on large environments, automation, and proactive guidance.

A few additional areas come to mind for improvement, including faster reporting and data access, easier endpoint enrollment, and integration automation.

I have over seven years of experience in the IT field. I have almost five years of experience using Microsoft Configuration Manager.

Microsoft Configuration Manager is stable.

Microsoft Configuration Manager scalability is very strong in my environment. In our organization, which has grown by adding more endpoints, remote users, and hybrid devices, Microsoft Configuration Manager has managed to handle the increased workload without requiring major changes on our side. The site serves collections and deployments continue to function efficiently even as the number of managed devices grows. Overall, Microsoft Configuration Manager scales effectively to manage a growing number of endpoints, and combined with Intune co-management, it handles hybrid environments well, though very large datasets can slow some reports slightly.

Customer support for Microsoft Configuration Manager is very good.

Positive

Before Microsoft Configuration Manager, we relied on manual processes and basic inventory tools, along with native OS update mechanisms. While these solutions gave us limited visibility to install software and hardware, they lacked automation, centralized control, and robust compliance features. Preparing reports, deploying updates, and maintaining configuration baselines was time-consuming and prone to error. We switched to Microsoft Configuration Manager because we needed centralized endpoint management for thousands of devices, automated software deployment, better patch management, and improved compliance and reporting capabilities.

We have definitely seen a return on investment using Microsoft Configuration Manager. While I cannot share exact financial figures, I can describe the impact in measurable items: time savings in tasks such as software deployment, patching, and inventory reporting used to take days for hundreds or thousands of endpoints. With Microsoft Configuration Manager, these processes are automated and managed, reducing the time required by roughly 40 to 50 percent. This includes reduced manual effort, audit compliance, and efficiency in risk management.

Microsoft Configuration Manager is licensed as part of Microsoft Endpoint Management manager, generally included in Microsoft volume licensing agreements. The cost is reasonable considering the enterprise-level features, but it scales depending on the number of managed devices and the inclusion of Intune for co-management. The platform delivers a strong ROI through automation, compliance, and endpoint management at scale.

Before choosing Microsoft Configuration Manager, we evaluated other options to find the best fit for our environment. Some of the options we considered included Intune standalone, Jamf Pro for managing Apple devices, and basic inventory and patch management tools provided natively by Windows. After evaluating these options, we chose Microsoft Configuration Manager because it offered the most comprehensive feature set for enterprise-scale endpoint management.

For organizations considering Microsoft Configuration Manager, here are some key points and advice: define clear objectives, allocate skilled resources, plan hybrid management with Intune, ensure accurate inventory data, start small, and provide training to staff before full-scale deployment. I give Microsoft Configuration Manager an overall rating of 9 out of 10.

My main use case for Microsoft Configuration Manager is patching and application deployment. We are mainly using patching, application deployment, device configuration, and device compliance. Remediation is also part of our use cases.

The features I find most valuable in Microsoft Configuration Manager are replication and scripting. If I want to get a fetch report for anything, such as hardware-related issues or group policy-related issues, I need to fetch the report by using SCCM's scripting language and remediation part.

The inventory collection features of Microsoft Configuration Manager are good because we always prefer the inventory. We do it by using the script language.

We use remote management capabilities in Microsoft Configuration Manager. Remote management capabilities are useful if the user is not providing access; we can use the backend users to update the group policy and sync the devices. These are the main features we require.

I can suggest that Microsoft Configuration Manager should get the Autopilot feature because Autopilot is the main part of Intune, and nowadays everybody is using Autopilot. It is now more valuable for Autopilot. I would prefer to have Autopilot in Microsoft Configuration Manager. Then most users will get the OS deployment instead of using Intune.

Other than that, improvements are needed for servers. Servers are still not getting it properly, so we could add the servers in Microsoft Configuration Manager for things such as OS deployment and Autopilot as well.

I have been working with Microsoft Configuration Manager for the last eight years.

Automated patch management is useful, but because of my company's organization security, they are not authorized to go with auto-patch. They first have me go ahead with it manually because they want to test further from the pilot as well as from any testing device. Due to vulnerability concerns, they want to check before production and proceed as per the change request and the entire process. That's why we have to do it manually.

Microsoft Configuration Manager is mostly deployed on the Azure cloud.

For scalability, the ability to scale and expand, I will definitely provide a rating of 10.

For technical support from Microsoft, I would rate them a nine. This is because there was one point where I did not get proper support from the engineer at that time, and there was a delay from the engineer. Because of the delay, we got an SLA. I would give them an eight to nine.

Positive

Microsoft is definitely better than AirWatch. However, since most users are using and upgrading with Apple devices, I would prefer AirWatch for the Apple devices.

The initial setup for Microsoft Configuration Manager is simple, not a big deal because we can use the CD or backup file. We can just run the setup and restore the backup, and we can run and finish.

The pricing for Microsoft Configuration Manager is okay for me, so I can give it a middle rating of four or five.

In my opinion, the main competitor for Microsoft Configuration Manager on the market is AirWatch. I can compare it to that because the Apple product is already out there.

Integrating Microsoft Configuration Manager with other Microsoft products is good. Since nowadays all companies are moving to Intune, most things are moving to Intune itself. Microsoft Intune is already on top now, so integration is also moving towards Intune.

I would definitely recommend Microsoft Configuration Manager for enterprise-level companies.

Overall, I believe Microsoft Configuration Manager is definitely a good product. Because it's Microsoft, I rate it 10 out of 10.

Currently, I am working only on Windows servers, so we don't deploy them using Microsoft Configuration Manager's Windows Deployment Services for deploying Windows OS. I used it a long time ago when I was managing normal workstations, and at that point we used Microsoft Configuration Manager for deployment.

Currently, I am only working on servers and we use other automations for deploying servers, not from Microsoft Configuration Manager. Microsoft Configuration Manager is mostly used for software deployment now.

The most valuable features I find in Microsoft Configuration Manager are mostly patching, deploying software, deploying images, and running custom scripts. I use most of the functionality from Microsoft Configuration Manager.

We used the role-based access control in Microsoft Configuration Manager, and we had different permissions for different people using the system. There are a couple of admins that have full access to Microsoft Configuration Manager and some users have only read access to see reports. Some users have limited access to only certain machines that we have because of GDPR, so there are different settings that we maintain.

It is quite easy and straightforward, and it works as it should if you configure it correctly when assessing the effectiveness of its software and security patching processes in maintaining system security.

The reporting functionality in Microsoft Configuration Manager could be improved as it is not very user-friendly. I quite often make custom reports, and this process could be enhanced.

A better command line interface for Microsoft Configuration Manager would be an additional feature I would to see in the future to make it closer to a perfect score, as there are some lacking capabilities in this area.

I have been working with this tool for 20 years in different companies, but not continuously with Microsoft Configuration Manager. I have worked in six companies and not all of them used it, but I estimate I have 15 years of experience with the solution.

I don't have any problems with scaling Microsoft Configuration Manager, as we have quite a lot of users and quite a lot of servers, so it's not a problem.

My experience with technical support by Microsoft varies. The quality differs depending on which technician you work with. Sometimes it's good, and sometimes it's poor.

Their response time and first-level support quality need improvement, as it's always quite complicated to describe the problem to the Microsoft team. The timely manner is acceptable as they follow the SLAs, but it's sometimes hard to communicate the problem effectively to them.

Neutral

The initial setup for Microsoft Configuration Manager is not straightforward, as it's quite complicated to set up from scratch.

The difficulties one might face while deploying include the complexity of the architecture, as you have to plan it wisely, divide sites, and consider your bandwidth or network configuration. In our case, it's quite simple because we have one site only, and even the remote sites are connecting to this one site. However, if you want to implement it with different sites and different management points, it becomes more complicated.

I don't have information about the pricing of Microsoft Configuration Manager because I don't work with that aspect. It's bundled with some other Windows licenses that we purchase as one large package, so I don't know the specific cost.

I am working with Microsoft Configuration Manager now. I am not able to disclose how many people are working with the product in my company. On a scale of 1-10, I rate Microsoft Configuration Manager a 7 out of 10.

My team mainly used Microsoft Configuration Manager for patching, software deployment, and configuration management.

We also used Microsoft Configuration Manager for deployment of Windows OS across my network as part of build management.

I worked with hardware and software inventory using Microsoft Configuration Manager to ensure that our CMDB is accurate, doing cross-checking and cross-reporting just to make sure the CMDB built on ServiceNow was healthy.

I cannot specifically say one feature, but I appreciate all features in general. The possibility or native capability of managing Microsoft networks and Microsoft endpoints is valuable for me.

The initial setup for Microsoft Configuration Manager is simple.

It was streamlined and fairly acceptable for us regarding the security patching process and maintenance system security through Microsoft Configuration Manager.

I have no suggestions for room for improvement, but perhaps expanding all functionalities as Microsoft offers to include Apple and other non-Microsoft products would be beneficial.

I worked with Microsoft Configuration Manager between 2010 and 2015.

I would rate the stability of Microsoft Configuration Manager as excellent. I had no major issues over those 15 years.

The scalability of Microsoft Configuration Manager is excellent.

Positive

I have worked with BMC Helix, Microsoft solutions from early days of Microsoft servers, SMB, SQL, SCCM, and BigFix.

The initial setup for Microsoft Configuration Manager is simple and straightforward.

I have worked extensively with ServiceNow, Microsoft solutions, and M365. 

I was managing teams, one of which was responsible for Microsoft Configuration Manager infrastructure, handling deployments, configuration management, and other features that Microsoft Configuration Manager offers.

I can recommend Microsoft Configuration Manager to other users. Based on my experience, I would rate it 9 out of 10.

I primarily use the product for image deployment to a few devices and some application deployment.

The product valuable for deployment recovery and it has done much more than that.

I recently started using the product, and it seems to be focused on deployment with an entire install, which I assume is the automation component. 

I have been using it for four or five years.

There were misconfigurations by our team rather than issues with the product itself. However, it does seem a bit buggy from time to time, based on what I have heard. That said, I can't provide much more information at this stage.

The product is suitable for our size, handling 800 devices. It is working well for now.

We don't really use customer service much, if at all. 

Negative

The initial setup was not done by us; it was deployed by a contractor a few years ago.

I don't believe they contacted anyone. They began work, and as mentioned, I think there were configuration issues. It was a relatively junior team using our OnTouch product, so it took some time for them to get up to speed.

The setup cost is considered sufficient. It is not significant enough for us to consider a change at the moment.

While I do not use the product frequently, many issues were due to configuration rather than the product itself. 

I cannot give an exact recommendation as it is not my area of responsibility. The team that uses it finds it adequate. It is presently good enough for us not to investigate other options. 

Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.

We utilize it for tasks such as ongoing OS patching, application deployment, configuring services, making adjustments to conferencing settings, comparing configurations across different systems, and implementing security measures, among other things.

Certainly, MECM, being MECM, is undeniably one of the best tools I've come across, having a plenty of features that have been steadily improving over time. In our role, it serves as an outstanding solution, particularly as a configuration manager. Nothing quite compares to MECM in this regard. The interface and its capabilities have been immensely helpful. While I've explored other tools on the market, including premium options, MECM stands out as superior to all of them. Moreover, it aligns seamlessly with Microsoft platforms and their various intricacies. It's a significant advantage.

The cloud account management is a valuable feature.

Regarding this, I'd like to mention the agent situation. When the agent on an end-user device is not functioning correctly, it can be quite problematic. It would be highly beneficial if there were a self-healing mechanism in place. Essentially, if the agent becomes corrupted or encounters issues, it should be able to rectify itself autonomously. This is particularly critical because, in order to utilize a tool like MECM (assuming you're referring to Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager), we need to deploy agents, known as AsMs, on all the devices we use, such as Windows 10 or Windows Server. Sometimes, when we deploy configurations or updates, they don't apply properly due to agent issues. This issue has been present since we began using MECM around 23 years ago. Unfortunately, there is currently no built-in mechanism for the agent to detect its own problems and initiate self-repair.

Microsoft doesn’t have any feature to scan vulnerabilities and hence, they could include those.

I would rate it six or seven out of ten.  There have been significant issues in the past, particularly over the last three years. Sometimes, the activities we attempt to implement are not entirely successful, and they end up being ignored. Achieving a full implementation success rate of 100% is challenging; typically, we reach about 90-95%. It requires substantial effort and diligence to get everything working as it should, highlighting the need for improvements in this regard.

MECM has impressive scalability. It can support up to 150,000 devices, and if you require more, you can simply add another primary site. This scalability is as advertised, and I have experience working in a large environment. I would rate it 9 out of 10. 

The timeline for setting up this system depends on the number of endpoints or end-users involved. For example, during my time at Walmart, where we were supporting around 350,000 endpoints and 8,000 servers, it took a few months to get the environment settled. In my current organization, which is focused on internal services, it only takes about a week, sometimes even just a couple of days. The process, though, remains quite similar. It can be done by a lot of people but requires support from teams. 

The setup process typically involves configuring prerequisites, setting up SQL Servers (especially for larger environments), and dealing with any network restrictions. Some networks have specific requirements and restrictions that need to be accommodated. As mentioned earlier, ensuring that your system can communicate with agents across the environment is crucial. In more basic terms, you'll need relays or distribution points in each data center or location. These distribution points help in routing and redistributing the data efficiently. The complexity of the setup mainly hinges on the number of offices and locations you're dealing with. Fortunately, the setup itself is straightforward and user-friendly, so understanding it doesn't require much time if you're familiar with the process.

The setup is extremely easy and I would rate it 10 out of 10. 

Certainly, in an enterprise environment, having an SME for deploying MECM is essential. Even though I can handle it myself and have experience implementing SCCM for over a hundred to two hundred and seven devices, I still seek the guidance of an SME to ensure I'm on the right track. It's always beneficial to have that expertise, especially when dealing with Microsoft products.

I would recommend it using simply and would rate it 8 out of 10.

We use the solution for remote control, patch management, and software deployment. 

The tool's most valuable features include security updates and patch management, which are critical functions for maintaining security. The automated software distribution and the ability to manage deployments are also highly useful. Enforcing compliance with set policies on systems is another key functionality we leverage.

The solution should incorporate AI. It should also incorporate real-time capabilities. If we could get real-time information about challenges or issues, it would allow us to take immediate action. For example, with the recent outage caused by the Windows issue, having a real-time warning system could have helped us avoid or reduce the downtime we experienced.

I have been working with the product for eight to ten years. 

I rate Microsoft Configuration Manager's stability a ten out of ten. 

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

As a main competitor to Microsoft Configuration Manager, I've used Ansible quite extensively as an alternative. There are also other products like those from Ivanti or Jamf. From an automation standpoint, we've tried Ansible and Chef as competitors. However, doing a direct function-by-function comparison is difficult since they all have different capabilities.

Our team is highly skilled, so it seems fairly straightforward from my perspective. However, the difficulty likely depends on skill levels.

The solution is expensive. Microsoft Configuration Manager would likely be considered high-priced for small businesses because they may not fully utilize all of its features and capabilities.

The solution is mostly for enterprises. Smaller businesses can opt for Microsoft Intune or other third-party products. I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

We primarily utilize SCCM for deploying and updating applications across our network. This includes managing crucial Windows updates to ensure our systems are up-to-date and secure.

One of the standout features of SCCM is its application management capabilities. It allows us to create packages efficiently and deploy them to specific groups within our network. This streamlined process has significantly improved our software distribution workflows. Regarding remote control capabilities, SCCM does offer these features. But I haven't extensively utilized them in my role. I'm aware that SCCM allows for remote querying and control, which can be beneficial for IT support and maintenance tasks.

While SCCM offers robust features for application management, we don't currently use it for device inventory and asset management purposes. For these tasks, we rely on a separate inventory management system.

I've been using Microsoft Configuration Manager (SCCM) for about a month now. During this time, I've gained experience in deploying and updating applications, including critical Windows updates. SCCM has been instrumental in streamlining our application management processes.

I rate SCCM around an eight for stability. It has proven to be a reliable tool for application management and deployment within our organization.

In terms of scalability, I believe there's room for improvement. While SCCM is capable of handling our current needs effectively, scalability could be enhanced to accommodate future growth and larger deployments.

Regarding technical support, I haven't needed to contact Microsoft directly for assistance. The resources available through their documentation and online forums have been quite helpful in resolving any issues or questions that arise.

The console provides an organized interface for managing applications, updates, and device groups. This made the setup process relatively smooth for me.

I would recommend SCCM to others, especially for organizations looking to streamline their application management processes and ensure compliance with software updates. It's a valuable tool that has positively impacted our software distribution and compliance efforts.

For me, the primary use cases of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager are in construction and architecture, where I assist in customizing the tools to achieve optimal performance at a confidential level. I have a team for level three and level four, which presents different scenarios and new features available for integration and customization to upgrade the SCCM restriction. I perform all tasks related to the product.

I am most familiar with the software update features. I also have expertise in analytics. In addition, I specialize in software updates and operating system deployment, which involves managing the endpoint solution.

There is room for improvement in one of the areas. Sometimes there are different compartments and problems with the web server, which makes it difficult to identify performance issues. Here, more tools configuration may be needed to address this. However, there are manual logs available for all modules and configuration actions.

There is one feature that is not present, which is antivirus monitoring. I would like to see this feature in the next release and also the integration of the module of monitoring of configuration directly into the configuration concept, to avoid having separate scopes for communication and configuration engineering. This would eliminate the need for multiple dashboards available for managers on the platform.

I started working on the software in 2010. It has been more than ten years since. Moreover, I have worked with all the older versions, and the last version I used was 22.07.

The product is very stable compared to older versions. The configuration is easy to upgrade, and if there is a problem with a combined server, the user can roll back to a previous version. Additionally, there are many tools available for covering different aspects of the product, which makes it a very important configuration.

It is a scalable solution and better suited for big companies.

It is not easy to get good technical support, especially at level one. It is difficult for the support team to understand the scope of the problem and provide specific solutions. The technical support is not good for me, but it depends on the comparison with other software functionalities. It's difficult to find a good support technician at Microsoft.

The initial setup is not complex, and the deployment time can vary depending on the company's size and the deployment's specific needs. Moreover, the solution can be started quickly if you have a server and a schedule with the primary setting.

The maintenance of the solution depends on the scope of the company's usage. For example, a large company may need a tracking system deployment and a team of four engineers for maintenance.

Additionally, there is a need for fees in order to implement changes, and there may be a charge of 30-40% for a different scope.

The price is reasonable, especially if the user has an active directory and can buy a configuration after buying the firmware.

My advice is to check the configuration for each customer, as it varies for each consumer. Staff should be trained to use Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager easily. Configuration is key, and it is used in the good projects of Microsoft. The project is simple, but people who manage it need to think simply.

Overall, I would rate the product an eight out of ten.

The main use case for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is in the area of desktop management, such as hardware inventory, software, and deployment management.

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 time the solution takes for updating systems could be quicker. For example, the system information status is not updating as it should. Additionally, the database synchronization querying is slow and could be improved. 

I have been using Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager for approximately 10 years.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is stable.

The scalability of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is great. We are able to extend the solution to multiple site locations.

Typically, we would contact Microsoft for technical support only if the issue at hand is beyond our expertise, as we try to resolve it as much as possible on our own. For more complex technical problems, we would submit a support ticket through Microsoft's email support system to receive advanced assistance. They have provided us with timely support when we needed it.

I previously used ManageEngine and a few others before the use of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager.

The main difference is the price and packages of the solutions. Some of them come as a complete package with VMware software as part of their offering. Depending on the customer's use case one solution might be better than the other. 

One area that stands out regarding Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager over the rest is its reliability.

The initial setup for Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is simple. However, the configuration and management are not simple.

Most of my clients are using the on-premise configuration. Cloud deployment is cumbersome because It requires lots of system communication to open from the cloud, and every client has to communicate with the cloud.

We follow the Microsoft best practices procedure and white papers for implementation. Which includes single and multiple server deployments.

The time it takes for deployment depends on the client's environment, such as the configuration and customization needed. However, the process can typically take two to three weeks to complete.

We use two to three engineers for the deployment of the solution.

The solution can be managed by one engineer. The person involved has to have some knowledge, and they need to be dedicated to the task. Not anyone can do it. It is ideal to have a team for the task.

The solution is helpful for IT teams.

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