We performed a comparison between AWS Systems Manager and Quest KACE Systems Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Microsoft, Red Hat, Quest Software and others in Configuration Management."Systems Manager has a feature where it analyzes the logs and gives us a performance overview in the form of a graph. We know when it's taking up more resources and when there are spikes, so we can predict the usability."
"There is one place for a lot of different things. If somebody has a problem with their computer, they will put in a ticket. From there, we will know who it is and the assets assigned to them, because there is one place to go look for what we are talking about and with whom we are talking. Just having one place for everything is really convenient. For example, we are able to deploy software to hundreds of computers. We don't need to go to each individual device."
"The big pros of Quest KACE Systems Management are its simple interface, and simple, direct management. It's very easy to maintain and manage the device, and it's easy to get it up and running. You can have it up and running in an hour..."
"The Systems Deployment Appliance is magical when it comes to automating deployment... Not only can we have multiple images, specific to end-users' uses, but we have a plethora of post-installation tasks to install or configure the system, tasks that can be re-used for each system. You just have one basic base image, and then you use the post-install tasks to customize everything else. It is amazing."
"Pretty much all of the features are valuable. The inventory is very helpful to be able to keep track of our devices. The deployments make it easy to deploy new software packages or upgrade packages. The help desk is also a great tool for tracking problems and problem tickets."
"The scripting is a very valuable feature, as it saves us time on pushing certain things out to the users, such as software and patches."
"Patching is definitely the most valuable feature. It gives us good, centralized software, which comes in very handy since we are doing 400 servers at a time. It enables us to manage all the servers, and to deal with the application team regarding reboots and scheduling."
"I like how when you click on the device, it shows you everything that has changed as well as the software versioning. I am really enjoying the inventory aspect of it."
"The most valuable feature is the imaging of computers through the SDA... Being able to do that so quickly with the SDA, and to then use the SMA for reinstalling software, has been huge for our productivity."
"We formerly used third-party products to analyze the log, give us information, and find bottlenecks. Systems Manager could provide more tools that conduct this analysis, so we don't have to do it ourselves."
"I would like them to implement VBScript language in KACE Systems Management. Currently, we can only use PowerShell."
"The labeling process should be more streamlined. It should be easier to do. It gets confusing at times."
"Paying for the product should come with full and extended training anytime it is needed."
"The software asset management functionality is an area that needs to be improved. It could be more automated because when connections need to be made, such as when I connected Adobe and my malware removed, the process was pretty much manual."
"I would like for there to be improvement when it comes to Microsoft and Windows updates. It has the ability to do it but the control of it is not there like I have in the Windows Server Update Services. The way KACE does it is still very granular. You don't really see the process like it is in the Windows Server Update Services. I think that would be one of the biggest things that I would like to see KACE really put some work into and really make that a big enhancement."
"It took a little bit of time to figure out how to use the KACE Service Desk. I like the way that I'm able to customize it. But when it comes to how our techs are able to use it, it's not as functional as our current solution, which is BMC FootPrints Service Desk."
"The initial setup was complex. It is a Linux-based virtual server, where the customer cannot get into the back-end, so you can only follow their prompts. Then, there are specific things that have to be done in their implementation and upgrade phases that have to be done in a certain order or steps. If you don't get those steps right, the system doesn't work. I think that either simplifying that process or providing really good step-by-step documentation would be helpful."
"The problem is that it's harder to directly emulate a lot of the stuff that the group policies do, using the KACE solution. With regular group policies, you just specify the various settings you want to change on the workstations, and then you specify the workstations and—while it's kind of an ugly mess—it does it. Whereas on KACE, you really have to know what you're doing with scripting to effectively script those exact same changes."
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
AWS Systems Manager is ranked 13th in Configuration Management with 1 review while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 31 reviews. AWS Systems Manager is rated 8.0, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of AWS Systems Manager writes "Root cause analysis helps us find source of unexpected spikes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "We can see everything for the endpoint management of devices using a single interface". AWS Systems Manager is most compared with AWS OpsWorks, Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Microsoft Intune and HashiCorp Terraform, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager, Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Micro Focus ZENworks Configuration Management.
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.
