We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Red Hat Satellite based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Configuration Management solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The main advantage is that Intune performs its intended functions effectively."
"Based on my experience, I find Intune very flexible for managing Windows devices. We can use scripting, and we can make use of the self-service portal or the company portal to publish some of the applications for Windows."
"The key benefit of Intune is its integration with the Microsoft ecosystem."
"It is very easy to use. It has a very easy interface."
"It's really easy to access."
"The conditional access policies that we set up are very useful."
"One of the standout features of Intune is its seamless accessibility to work data, eliminating the need to be tied to an office or a desktop."
"The solution has reduced the risk of security breaches by 30%."
"It saves a lot of money when you can install things automatically and they are installed the exact same way on every computer."
"We're a Microsoft-centric organization, so we are happy with the integration between products."
"Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is valuable in keeping our systems updated. We are able to send updates to all the systems. Additionally, the Intune integration is helpful."
"There have to be made some improvement in WSUS and control in other non-Microsoft products updates."
"The most valuable feature of SCCM is the application distribution."
"It is a very good solution. It has a good interface and is easy to use. On top of that, it is very reliable in terms of distribution as well as getting the report."
"You can remote control or RDP. That has been the most valuable because we can go into one console and can get to anything we want. Instead of going to all these different consoles, we centralized everything."
"The cloud account management is a valuable feature."
"The product allows us to handle patching for multiple servers at a time manually."
"The most valuable feature is the management of the distributed tool we use in the Red Hat Linux Servers."
"It cuts down significantly on the administrative time it takes to patch systems in a large environment."
"Fixing is the most valuable. When you deal with a lot of hardware and software and you have a lot of packages, fixing is a bit difficult. You need to track and pull up all such things, but Satellite makes this task easy. We have branches in other locations, and I can manage other branches by using Satellite Capsule, which is a great feature."
"We've been getting reasonable support from Red Hat."
"Technical support has been good."
"The product is convenient to use."
"The most valuable feature is the fact that you don't have to expose your mission-critical environment to the Internet. With the Satellite system in place, it acts as a barrier between your Red Hat infrastructure and the public Internet."
"There needs to be more support for Mac operating systems."
"The backend of Microsoft Intune needs to be improved. We have seen a little bit of delay as compared to other MDM solutions. That needs to be improved. A little bit more granularity should also be added"
"Data leak prevention can be integrated into it. Currently, it does not have data leak prevention."
"It would be better if I could integrate it with my core group policy. I would like to have a group policy in my current environment, which has strict control, but those things are still missing. Although it has maximum compliance and security, it's not available on-premise."
"Microsoft Intune's support for Mac devices is lacking and could be improved."
"It would be helpful if there was proactive remediation."
"I'd like some more reporting so that I don't have to delve into PowerShell and I can pull more of the local device information such as memory, apps installed, etc. It would be nice to be able to see the apps that are present there but might not be managed. For example, if they installed 7Zip, it could report that back via an installed program or feature to see what was currently installed."
"There could be more wizard-driven policy development or creation. Some of the policies can get quite complex. If they have a wizard that assists the administrators in creating the policy, that will be a great job."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"The tool's deployment is complex and depends on the architecture you want to implement."
"The downside of Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is it's an on-premise-based solution. With the pandemic coming on board the need to support users across the globe has increased. For a while, we would use the in-built Microsoft Teams screen sharing feature but the disadvantage of that is you cannot perform privileged access. Microsoft does not give you access to that. That's where you need cloud-based tools, such as BeyondTrust or Freshservice."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
"In spite of us being a premier customer we find the support unsatisfactory."
"The analysis is something that can be integrated. Their report analysis can be improved a little bit due to the fact that most of the time complaints policies are saved by the admins. It's something that we need to look into and search for."
"The solution should be more compatible with different versions of Linux."
"I want the system to provide some dependency relations. I would also like to see the relationship between different machines."
"The product could have more diversity in what it is able to deploy and might do better if it was not dedicated to Red Hat products only."
"It wasn't easy in the beginning, and some effort was required to work it out. I already had the product documentation, but it was not well organized. It wasn't easy to follow. There were a lot of documents here and there."
"I would like the direct integration with insights to be re-established."
"Red Hat Satellite's pricing needs improvement."
"They could make it more easy to use and improve the GUI so that it's more intuitive."
"There could be a feature to simplify the process without the requirement of any patch manager subscription."
"It should basically include a complete slew of system management and monitoring tools such as Nagios. It should be a single pane of glass that gives us a complete solution. It is a good solution, but it is missing a few important things. We're using Capsule for DMVs on other secured zones. Capsule is a part of Satellite to be a proxy of sorts."
"It has not been significantly updated in a while."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 2nd in Configuration Management with 78 reviews while Red Hat Satellite is ranked 4th in Configuration Management with 21 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Red Hat Satellite is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Red Hat Satellite writes "A good product for managing patches and updates that could be more robust and up-to-date". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, BigFix, Tanium and Quest KACE Systems Management, whereas Red Hat Satellite is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, SUSE Manager, AWS Systems Manager, BigFix and Chef. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Red Hat Satellite report.
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.