Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Reviews

We can use the tool monthly to make updates concerning security and other things.

The tool has only one feature, which is updates. 

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services needs to improve its reporting feature. The tool's competitor has better reporting capabilities. 

I have been using the product for 15 years.

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is scalable. My company has around 1000 systems. 

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services deployment is easy. You must go to the Windows features and configure the system. Then, you can install the updates. Once installed, you can start configuring the required settings. All these configurations are straightforward and can be set up in the Windows Update System Server console. Once it is set up, it downloads all the updates from Microsoft. It will then deliver the updates to the system based on our policies and rules.

The solution's deployment can be done in-house. 

We need one single key for Windows deployments, which is a better option. Buying a license with the same key for all systems, like Windows and Windows Desktop, makes configuring easier. Otherwise, it isn't easy to manage multiple keys for different systems.

You can get the tool as a default feature in Windows. You can manage everything from one single place using WUSS. It's free and comes with Windows, but you must buy a license. I rate the overall product a seven out of ten. The solution requires people with experience in systems. 

The solution can be used to update PCs and servers.

The tool is not good for managing updates across the organization. It doesn't update the clients as well as it should. We end up going through things manually to ensure that everything's right. We can't rely on the product.

I don't think there's anything we can do to make it any better. It's a really poor product. It doesn't work. The product must identify machines on the network and add them to the system. At the moment, we can't add a machine to the system. We have to wait until the tool finds it.

I have been using the solution for two to three years.

I rate the solution’s scalability a two out of ten. The system is old. It doesn't work. We have one user in our organization.

I rate the ease of setup a two out of ten. The setup is difficult. It takes 12 to 24 hours to collect the data from the network. It does not collect all the data needed.

Configuration Manager is less expensive than Microsoft Windows Server Update Services.

We're looking to use Configuration Manager.

There are better ways to get information than using the product's reporting capabilities. We use support to learn about updates. People must not use Microsoft Windows Server Update Services. Overall, I rate the product one out of ten.

We use the product to manage patch updates for servers.

The platform’s dashboard and reporting features need enhancement.

We have been using Microsoft Windows Server Update Services for 15 years.

I rate the platform’s stability an eight out of ten.

We have 400 Microsoft Windows Server Update Services users in our organization. It is a scalable platform. We never had any issues related to scalability.

The technical support team could have extensive knowledge about the application.

Neutral

The initial setup is straightforward. We began by thoroughly reviewing the installation manual to gain a clear understanding of the prerequisites and requirements for the application. We started preparing servers and integrations, followed by deploying the agent across all machines to centralize management through WSUS. It takes time to understand specific criteria to be deployed automatically.

We implemented the product ourselves.

The implementation of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services (WSUS) has significantly improved our patch management process by shifting our approach from reactive to proactive. We can automate the process instead of relying on manual methods.

The platform provides good value in terms of time and effort by eliminating the need for manual patch management. It gives us more time to concentrate on other aspects of the project.

We encountered a few technical issues with the application related to deployment agents and operating system compatibility. We were able to overcome the challenges by escalating the case to the engineers.

I recommend the product to others as it is an easy-to-use patch management or deployment monitoring system. It is the best solution for all business use cases. However, I advise others to understand their business requirements before making the purchase decision.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

As a system administrator at my organization, I use Microsoft WSUS to manage the updates for all the Microsoft products that we are using. Since WSUS is a service that handles the Microsoft updates and their deployments to a group of servers, you could technically call it patch management software.

Just like IIS, it comes built-in with the version of Windows Server that you are using, and we are currently using WSUS on Windows Server 2022 to efficiently manage the updates on all the other servers in our organization.

When you're working in the IT department of an organization, you will often have to set policies regarding what users can and cannot download from the internet, especially when it comes to updates. Most updates are binary files and programs, and these are types of files that can sometimes be harmful, so an organization needs a way to prevent the downloading of these files.

Instead of leaving each server to download their own updates, with WSUS you have a centralized management tool for all the updates alongside a log for all the servers. By creating and deploying a WSUS server that will download the updates from the internet and dispatch them to the other servers, you can have control over the entire deployment process.

Essentially, it's like a Windows Update proxy that you absolutely need to have, as the IT department grants the WSUS server an exception to download files of any type from the internet. This is the only server with such an exception so that you can control what is entering or exiting the network with regard to updates.

The advantage that is offered by WSUS is not only that you can manage all updates (e.g. critical updates, essential updates, feature updates, driver updates, etc.), but also that you can manage the updates per type of operating system; for example, Windows 10, Windows 11, Windows Server 2022, Windows Server 2019, and so on. It provides you a way to create classifications of types of updates per type of operating system. And all this, you can do from a single management console.

The main problem with WSUS is that the management console doesn't allow you to do a lot of operations. It's actually quite a primitive console, and has been since day one. In order to be more effective, you need to use another tool from Microsoft that can take advantage of WSUS and also offer you the extra features you need.

For example, SCCM (System Center Configuration Manager) is software from Microsoft that uses WSUS and gives you many more features than you would get from using WSUS alone. To truly manage the updates of your entire environment effectively, you either need to automate the features you need with PowerShell scripts or you need to use SCCM.

To illustrate one particular limitation of the basic WSUS management console, when you download updates with classifications per operating system, sometimes it doesn't offer you a good way to display or regroup updates that are part of a specific group. Or, as another example, if you just want to see the latest updates, the WSUS console will simply show you all the updates that are available. Microsoft uses an updating process whereby each new update will supersede the previous one, meaning it will expire the old updates, but the management console doesn't offer you a way to regroup or display only the new updates while excluding the ones that have expired. This is one of the many management features that are missing from the WSUS console.

One other area of improvement is that when you want to add servers to use WSUS, you can't easily add or search for a server. To add a server into the management console, you need to do other things and wait until the check cycle starts, meaning that you need to wait for a while until you see the newly-added server that will be handled by the WSUS server.

We started using Microsoft WSUS in 2015, although after a few technical problems we stopped using the service because it was causing us a lot of trouble. Later, in 2022, I redeployed a server that we now use to manage the updates for all the Microsoft products that we are using.

As one of the administrators for our WSUS server, I would say that it is very stable.

Regarding the scalability, you can actually configure something of an ERP version of the WSUS service. For example, if you work in a company that has multiple sites and these sites are located in other states or countries, you can deploy WSUS for each site. Once you've done that, these WSUS servers will all communicate with a parent WSUS server that will then deploy updates to each child WSUS.

Therefore, I'd say that WSUS is quite scalable since we can make servers communicate with one another, in the sense that you have one parent source that communicates with and deploys updates to each child WSUS service in a hierarchical arrangement.

My rating for WSUS would be the same rating I would give the overall technical support from Microsoft, and it all depends on the criticality of the incident. Microsoft will sometimes call you within 24-48 hours depending on the urgency of your request, and most of the time, Microsoft support does a good job.

We haven't used any other solution for this type of process as there are no other products that offer the same service, because Windows Update is part of the Windows Server operating system. It is like a black box that nobody knows anything about and you aren't provided with any tools that can offer the same job that the WSUS server does.

Setting up WSUS is quite easy, but the installation itself is just a feature you can enable in your server. If you really want to use it well, you need to do extra configuration tasks, not only in the WSUS server but also in the Active Directory server. You will typically have to create a few network group policies and other configurations in addition to setting up WSUS itself.

I was responsible for deploying our current WSUS server, but we are still in the testing stage. We haven't yet deployed WSUS to be used in a production environment at all, since we are still adding in servers one by one, testing everything as we go along.

The licensing of WSUS is free of charge because it comes with the Windows Server operating system, included as a feature of the operating system itself. It's simply a role that you enable within Windows Server. Technically, we are only a customer of Microsoft and not a customer of WSUS.

For example, if your license for the Windows Server 2022 operating system costs, let's say, $400, then this license will include WSUS and all the other features of the Windows Server operating system (like IIS, etc.). So, ultimately, to speak of the licensing of WSUS, you have to refer to the price of the server license and what kind of contract you have with Microsoft. If you rent, it's a rental license contract, or otherwise you might go with a volume license contract.

Suppose a corporation wants you to buy a number of licenses, and you opt for a group of individual licenses at a price of, for example, $200 per license. If you want to deploy 50 servers, you will need to buy 50 licenses. This method of licensing is very expensive and it will cost far too much to be reasonable. That's why Microsoft offers what are called "volume license" packages.

With volume licensing, Microsoft gives you a discount if you buy a large number of licenses. But with the volume type of licensing, you are not able to get upgrades for the next version, such that if you currently have Windows 10 or Windows Server 2019, you can't upgrade to Windows 11 or Windows Server 2022, respectively. Although these licenses are perpetual, you will be stuck with the same version.

The better option is to go for a rental contract, which means that you merely rent a certain number of licenses each year, and these licenses won't expire unless the contract expires (at which point you lose access to the portal where you can download operating systems and other applications along with their licenses). Importantly, these licenses give you the ability to do upgrades from one version to another. For as long as you are on a rental contract, you will pay an amount of money depending on the type of software you want to rent (e.g. Windows Server, Microsoft SQL Server, Windows 10, Windows 11, Office 365, Visual Studio, etc.), and you will always be able to upgrade from one version to another.

This is just a basic overview of the licensing models from Microsoft; the details are much more complicated.

One piece of advice I can give is that it's important to acknowledge that, sometimes, updates can bring their own problems. For example, when you install an update, you need to wait until the computer restarts, and in some cases updates can cause the computer to crash. The crash may even be so severe that you need to reformat the machine and, thus, you lose your data.

When talking about other administrators who are wondering about whether to use WSUS, I can confirm that it's a very good tool. And, if you're also using SCCM, WSUS is even better because SCCM will give you a lot of features that are not provided by the basic version of WSUS.

If you want to deploy updates with WSUS, you must remember that it's always best to deploy only the security updates and critical updates that are recommended by Microsoft, because other types of updates such as essential updates, driver updates, and feature updates can sometimes cause instabilities in the system.

And sometimes these extra updates can cause problems with other products. For example, you can sometimes disrupt another product from Microsoft by installing an independent system update that will cause, for example, the mailing service to malfunction. You always need to be sure to do backups of the servers before using WSUS to perform updates.

Finally, there are a few other things that you will need to know in order to run an effective WSUS server, such as how to work with Active Directory. With Active Directory, you can more easily configure which servers will use the WSUS and which ones will not. For example, if you want the servers to perform updates through WSUS, you need to set this option in the Active Directory server. If, instead, you want the leave the computers to get their updates from the internet directly, you will also need to set this up in Active Directory. To do all this, you need to have at least a minimum amount of knowledge in creating group policies, security policies, and so on.

I would rate Microsoft WSUS an honest eight out of ten, because even though some of the features are lacking, it handles the basic stuff very well.

We use the solution for the internal server. We use the tool to push Windows updates to the computers. It is mainly for internal patch management. We use the tool to manage updates across different server environments.

We can track the updates of the PC and servers. The reporting features are good. The testing and reporting processes are better than those of other tools.

The policies must be made easier. The tool must allow users to update the policies. Currently, we can only create policies and update a few things in them. The product must provide more functions. The approval process must be improved. Currently, it is a very simple process. We just approve security updates and critical updates. Other vendors have better approval processes.

I have been using the solution for many years.

I rate the tool's stability nine out of ten.

I rate the tool's scalability eight out of ten. Most of the time, we have only one server for the whole organization. We have 500 computers.

The support is very good.

Positive

The deployment process is very straightforward and easy.

The price is medium. The tool could be cheaper.

We recommend the tool to our customers unless they specifically require a different solution. Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We use the solution to update servers and clients.

The solution performs well.

We have some problems when we update the servers.

I have been using the solution for 15 years.

The tool is very stable.

The tool is scalable. We have approximately 1000 users in our organization. We have about 20 people in our technical team.

We contact support if we face any errors. We get support from the integrators.

Positive

The initial setup was complex. Sometimes, if there is an error, it takes a very long time to correct it.

The deployment can be done in-house.

We can use ManageEngine instead of Microsoft. I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

The solution is used to push the patches, have a central location for patch management, attach all your service infrastructure, keep up to date, and serve security updates.

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is an easy-to-use and stable solution.

The solution's stability could be improved because sometimes, there are some problems in communication and sending updates and patches.

I have been using Microsoft Windows Server Update Services for several years.

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is a very stable solution.

I rate Microsoft Windows Server Update Services a nine out of ten for stability.

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is a scalable solution. Around 60 to 70 users use the solution in our organization.

The solution's technical support is great.

The solution's initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The solution's deployment takes around three months. The solution can be deployed in-house depending on how strong the IT department is within the organization.

Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is not an expensive solution.

I would recommend the solution to other users. If someone wants a less costly solution and doesn't want to invest too much in licenses, they can choose Microsoft Windows Server Update Services. The solution is more suited for small businesses, not huge enterprise customers.

Overall, I rate Microsoft Windows Server Update Services a nine out of ten.

We use the solution primarily for patching. It is a very crucial activity in terms of maintaining up-to-date images and safeguarding the operating system from different bugs and avoiding crashes. We keep everything updated, including security patches. We have multiple servers based on different flavors of Windows Server and different versions also from 2008, 2012, 2016, 2019, and 2022.

Based on the policy, we deploy patches on whichever particular Windows Server on the required schedule.

Patch and security management is a very crucial activity. It is actually periodical and it should be done on a monthly basis or a weekly basis, depending on the requirement. Maintaining the patching to the latest version is a very crucial and difficult task. It's helped us to maintain patch management cycles.

We can easily download particular patches, and we can apply them on a group basis and policy basis.

It is stable.

We can scale the product.

We have a web-based GUI and can access it from other systems, also. We can always update all the policies and patches with ease if there is a good GUI. They need to continue to offer the GUI interface to make patching easier.

They should offer patch management across platforms.

They should also include application software. Catered options should be included for different applications. They should offer a generic patch management solution for general applications.

I've been using the solution for more than ten years. 

This is a stable solution. We don't find many bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

The solution is scalable. We can add multiple Windows Servers in the groups. We handle between 400 and 500 (or more) devices.

We can easily scale up at any time just by adding servers to the updated services. 

Technical support has been helpful and responsive. 

Positive

We tried some different products, including ManageEngine Patch Management and Automox.

The implementation process offers a moderate level of difficulty. It's not easy, nor is it complex. 

You need one Windows Server, at least for maintenance. 

We don't require the purchase of any commercial products for patch management and therefore aren't really investing anything. From the technical side, we can easily manage the patching and keep our system up to date, which is useful.

In terms of licensing, it's a Windows Server feature, so it will come under the Windows Server. That said, we require some care licenses for that Windows Server.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

New users need to precisely and carefully define the policies and catalogs at the outset. It's important to have everything aligned before deployment to avoid downtime. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.