We performed a comparison between Microsoft Configuration Manager and Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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 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."
"Valuable features include configurations enforcement, compliance data gathering, and deployment of a standardized OS."
"With the SCCM inventory, we found a lot of rogue applications. We were able to identify them, find out who was running them, and either put them on our application list or remove them."
"Provides great insight into the functionalities of the data scope."
"The solution has a very good set of features."
"I like the data collection."
"Technical support was helpful and responsive."
"Patching is the main feature because SCCM is made to control the entire environment without manually interpreting. So it is good to use for patching."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is an easy-to-use and stable solution."
"The interface is easy to use."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The product provides a valuable Single Sign-On (SSO) integration feature within our IES environment, particularly with the IT directory and server systems."
"The solution has great potential and leaves the user with almost limitless possibilities. It is truly a product with a million uses."
"The reporting capabilities that help maintain compliance and security are good."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is the efficiency once configured."
"The most valuable feature is Server Update's stability."
"The reports are too busy. They could be simpler. I'm a technician, so I don't care how pretty the reports look. They should be easy to read. I'm designing this for production folks. They need to read the reports quickly when they're patching in the middle of the night."
"Based on my experience with SCCM 2016, the main, big issue is not having a good user-friendly environment. It needs much better GUI."
"On some hardware, we'd like an easier way to get peripherals attached."
"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."
"SCCM does not scale well, which is one of the reasons we are not going to continue to use it."
"The solution could improve the functionality for automating, license management. Additionally, more and better-looking reports are needed."
"With Microsoft Premier Support, you get what you pay for. There's Third Tier Support that you pay for. If you pay for that, you get excellent support, and if you don't pay for that, then you get the less experienced staff."
"The main room for improvement is the on-screen display. I think it would be good if some improvements were made."
"User interface is outdated and not user-friendly."
"It would be good if it could deploy third-party patches or applications."
"Microsoft Windows Server Update Services must include functions for providing updates about inventory."
"Job management and control is an area that is in need of improvement."
"The product needs to improve its user interface."
"The old backup files created by this solution use up a lot of storage, and this needs to be improved."
"More integration with different platforms would be an improvement."
"Setup is complex."
More Microsoft Configuration Manager Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Windows Server Update Services Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Configuration Manager is ranked 1st in Patch Management with 76 reviews while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is ranked 3rd in Patch Management with 37 reviews. Microsoft Configuration Manager is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Microsoft Configuration Manager writes "Seamless system updates, useful integration, and reliable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Windows Server Update Services writes "Lets us manage all our organization's updates from a single management console". Microsoft Configuration Manager is most compared with Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, ManageEngine Endpoint Central, Microsoft Intune and BigFix, whereas Microsoft Windows Server Update Services is most compared with BigFix, ManageEngine Patch Manager Plus, Ivanti Neurons Patch for Intune, Quest KACE Systems Management and Kaseya VSA. See our Microsoft Configuration Manager vs. Microsoft Windows Server Update Services 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.