We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and OpenText Operations Orchestration based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Zabbix, Microsoft, ServiceNow and others in Server Monitoring."The main, clear valuable feature is updating the latest, patches and updates from Windows. This is the main feature we really utilize a lot."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"SCCM does everything from A to Z for a Windows operating system."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the availability of being able to manage the Microsoft estate. It handles many areas, such as asset management and tracking."
"The major features of this product are the reporting tools. The most valuable features are package deployment and application deployment. Security management is also good because any vulnerability will be identified, and you can fix it. It's the best tool because you never know what kind of client you will have. For example, you may have your offices in low bandwidth remote areas. But it's achievable because it accommodates the bandwidth that you have available. Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is an excellent reporting tool for your environment. If you want to know the details about the hardware configuration, software configuration, what is causing a problem, or when a new feature update comes in for Windows, even that goes on SCCM itself. A lot of deployment stuff."
"Microsoft Configuration Manager is integrated with other Microsoft products."
"It gives us the ability to set up schedules, according to what our security requirements are, to automate the patching of our servers and desktops."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is the software deployment. Additionally, Microsoft integrates most of the other solutions well with one another."
"It has reduced the time taken to go to market. In the past, we were struggling with building these integrations, but now the process has sped up and there is an added advantage of quick delivery. In addition, it is an agent-less solution, which provides more flexibility in terms of multiple options."
"The product is good functionality-wise. I am impressed with the tool's flexibility in customization."
"It's very stable. If you ask me for the success rate metrics, it's more than 90% for both."
"It needs to be able to load faster during deployment."
"There is no asset management package included."
"The solution is a bit heavy on the sources such as RAM or CPU and the software needs to be a bit lighter."
"Could do with some cosmetic improvements on the user interface."
"A lot of experience is needed in terms of troubleshooting, as this is one of the most difficult tasks in MECM. We were seven people in a group and I was the only one that had the patience to do the troubleshooting at times."
"The database should be made to be more stable and robust, but not so much the configuration."
"The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux."
"They should improve their anti-malware policies like the SCEP policies. For instance, you can't have different policies for different servers, there is only one policy in all the servers, and everything is covered under that. For example, say you want to scan one group of servers on Saturday, and then you want to scan another group of servers on Sunday, you can't do that. You have to scan all your servers, a regular scan or a full scan, on the same day and at the same time. That's definitely one thing they need to resolve. In the next release, it would actually be nice if they included Apple products. It will also help if you can use Intune again. Their compliance reporting feature could also be better. They can maybe work a bit on that for patching now. It would be better if SCCM came with the functions of Right Click Tools built-in. If SCCM would have all those functions already built-in, we won't have to go and spend $5,000, just as an add-in from another company to get those functions."
"The tool's UI needs to be improved. It needs to have better administration features in future releases."
"There were a lot of scalability issues that we initially faced. Whenever I tried to deploy 100-200 endpoints, it became a huge challenge. We had to actually start using other tools like Tivoli Endpoint Management in order to patch the issues."
"The price is an area that should be addressed because the price is high."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More OpenText Operations Orchestration Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Server Monitoring with 78 reviews while OpenText Operations Orchestration is ranked 17th in Process Automation with 24 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while OpenText Operations Orchestration is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText Operations Orchestration writes "HP OO blows away the competition, but has its fair share of flaws". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune, BigFix and Tanium, whereas OpenText Operations Orchestration is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, Control-M, Camunda, BigFix and Microsoft System Center Orchestrator.
We monitor all Server Monitoring 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.