We performed a comparison between GFI LanGuard and Scalefusion based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Patch Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable feature is that I am able to patch third-party solutions."
"The most valuable features of GFI LanGuard are the vulnerability assessment, it provides us with substantial insight into what applications are running on the endpoint systems and what vulnerabilities are there in the running applications. The second would be the assets tracking. I'm able to see in the network whether my endpoint server is operating and if all the other IT equipment is running in the environment. Additionally, GFI LanGuard is not heavy on system resources. It gives a competitive advantage over others."
"This product is a great solution at a great price as long as it is only going to be used for a local area network."
"It is helpful to patch and scan vulnerabilities."
"The most useful features of GFI LanGuard are vulnerability assessment and patching solutions."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable feature of GFI LanGuard is its email spam feature."
"The solution is easy to use and integrates well with other operating systems."
"Scalefusion is easy to use, and they have a broad knowledge base, so you can quickly find answers if you're unsure how to do something. The articles on the knowledge base are well-written, with clear steps on what to do for a specific scenario. That part is well documented."
"GFI LanGuard could improve the rollback feature. If we have installed the wrong we have had some issues with the rollback function. Additionally, more input from GFI LanGuard for the custom software push install."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding asset tracking."
"The version we are using only allows one person to use it at a time and does not allow multi-users."
"The documentation on how to use this solution in a Linux environment is not clear, which is something that should be improved because it is complicated."
"This solution is limited to the local area network only and cannot manage remote devices."
"The only drawback with GFI LanGuard is that you cannot directly integrate it from the Outlook email; instead, you have to first log in to the site to make changes."
"GFI LanGuard can improve by adding more modules, such as asset control or asset inventory."
"If GFI LanGuard had a cloud version it would be better for people that are working from home."
"It could be easier to put devices on the blocklist. I would like the ability to block a device with a click of a button. Currently, we have to sift through different groups to block a device. It would be nice if Scalefusion allowed me to block without moving the device to a different profile. Another helpful feature they could add is the ability to migrate from one MDM to another. I'd also appreciate more extensive cloud storage. They give you 1 GB by default, but sometimes that's not enough."
GFI LanGuard is ranked 9th in Patch Management with 10 reviews while Scalefusion is ranked 19th in Patch Management with 2 reviews. GFI LanGuard is rated 8.0, while Scalefusion is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of GFI LanGuard writes "A scalable, competitively priced solution with a good ROI and easy setup process ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Scalefusion writes "An MDM solution for controlling and restricting data on devices". GFI LanGuard is most compared with ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Ivanti Patch for Endpoint Manager and BigFix, whereas Scalefusion is most compared with SOTI MobiControl, VMware Workspace ONE, JumpCloud and Microsoft Intune. See our GFI LanGuard vs. Scalefusion report.
See our list of best Patch Management vendors.
We monitor all Patch 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.
