We performed a comparison between Forescout Platform and Quest KACE Systems Management based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Compliance solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The interface is easy to use."
"Forescout Platform's best feature is plug-in integration."
"This solution can be used to organize guest portals, integrate switches, and create policies. Some of its standard use cases also include completing key process upgrades and anti-virus of Windows OS."
"Forescout Platform's most valuable features are that it is very granular. We are able to cull out a lot of information about our particular device or endpoint. The configuration and the visibility are very seamless. Overall the solution is very easy to handle and it's very comprehensive."
"The plugins are very robust -- the ability scanner, patch management system, and SQL integrator."
"The user interface is quite simple."
"It allows for good detection of all the vendor products we have on-site."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment, which does not require the use of an agent."
"This product made the job easy to do without having to go put hands on the machines."
"I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time."
"The scripting part increases IT productivity because of the specialized software in our environments for students' courses. You need to use software which is not programmed by developers. A lot of software for building houses or other things is developed by normal guys, who do not have much skill in programming. When you need to install this type of software, it is very difficult. You have to install registry keys, etc. For that, it is very good to use the scripting part of this solution. So, you can automate this part as well."
"Asset management is most valuable. It is essential for all customers. The other features are also useful, but asset management is most important."
"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."
"KACE’s knowledge-based articles are very good."
"The solution provides us a single pane of glass with everything that we need for endpoint management of all devices. It definitely has made our endpoint management process much easier."
"We can get the majority of what we need with this product and do not have to spend money on something else."
"The solution needs more definitive pricing. The costs are hard to nail down."
"As a product, there is nothing to complain about. However, they should improve their overall support. You need that level of knowledge, that level of information is clearly not available. First and foremost, that information is not accessible. The second point to mention is that once you purchase the later support and services. That is, they will continue to charge you for every service."
"For the user, the policy that they have implemented sometimes needs adjustments. Sometimes the features that the customer asks for aren't involved in the main installation, and I need to bolt an add-on in. However, I never know if this policy is the right one when I do this."
"Custom integrations need to be better."
"Better integration with third-party vendors is needed because as it is now, the list of third-party solutions that we can integrate and automate is quite limited."
"Forescout Platform sometimes returns false positives, so there's some fine-tuning to be done there."
"This solution is not that easy to scale but this depends on a company's needs."
"The biggest disadvantage is the pricing."
"Sometimes the information is not as real time as it's supposed to be."
"We had issues with the tool's support. We are a Dutch firm and everything has to be in Dutch. We were not able to do the alerts. You were required to tweak them a lot to get them in the language that you preferred. The solution's support depended on the person that you got online. Sometimes, the response was fast and other times you needed to wait a long time. The support also depended on the levels of support that you had requested."
"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."
"It could be designed a little bit more intuitively in terms of administration."
"What could be improved is the possibility to use replicas in a secure way outside our network in order to maintain the machines that never connect to our corporate network."
"There isn't a lot they need to improve with the solution itself at this point. It is pretty close to providing a single pane of glass for everything that we need for endpoint management specifically on all devices. There is very little that it doesn't provide for us, and for those, we have to go to other methods. There are some of the patching solutions that it doesn't take care of for us. So, we have to do those manually on the devices, and that's really the biggest thing. It doesn't do patching really well for non-Microsoft applications. The major application updates, particularly Windows updates, don't function nearly as well, but, for the vast majority of things, it does just fine. If they could improve in this aspect, that'd be great, but I don't know if they're going to be able to do that."
"They could make the booting solution easier for different things, e.g., easier to insert drivers. They could make it easier to create a new image and put it onto the server. Those would be some nice solutions. They could make it so that somebody who has no knowledge at all can do it. That would be really nice. Because every time, until I get it memorized, I still need to go back to the training, the manual, or Google it to figure it out again. If they would make it a lot easier, to where a nine-year-old could do it, that would be really cool. If they made it easier, I could have more people managing the images on the server, instead of just one or two people."
"KACE implemented the possibility of reducing the network speed of the KACE agent. You can set it so that it takes whatever network speed you want or you can set it to 5 Mb, to save network speed. You set it for all the computers, but it would be preferable to separate between VPN connections in our home office and the local area. It would be great to be able to set separate speeds for different VLANs."
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forescout Platform is ranked 4th in Endpoint Compliance with 69 reviews while Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 5th in Endpoint Compliance with 38 reviews. Forescout Platform is rated 8.4, while Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Forescout Platform writes "We can go granular on each endpoint, quarantine non-compliant machines, and target vulnerabilities through scripting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". Forescout Platform is most compared with Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine), Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Nozomi Networks and Armis, whereas Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform. See our Forescout Platform vs. Quest KACE Systems Management report.
See our list of best Endpoint Compliance vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Compliance 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.
