We performed a comparison between Quest KACE Systems Management and SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor 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."Remote Wipe and Autopilot is one of the best features."
"Maturity makes it a stable product."
"The solution is stable."
"We have found the solution is capable of scaling."
"Intune can wipe devices. For example, if a disgruntled employee wants to leak the data on their company phone, Intune can terminate their access and wipe the entire device with a click."
"It's really easy to access."
"With on-premises Active Directory, the main challenge was that we had no control when a user was working from home. We didn't know what exactly a user was doing and whether the AV was up to date or not. Intune provides better control of their machines."
"The initial setup is not complex."
"This solution makes it easy to control assets and upgrade all types of software."
"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."
"Using this solution saves us lots of time, especially when it comes to performing updates."
"There is ease of use, and its pricing was a driving factor."
"The service desk can be configured and customized to better serve our environment."
"The scripting is a very valuable feature, as it saves us time on pushing certain things out to the users, such as software and patches."
"We can get the majority of what we need with this product and do not have to spend money on something else."
"With KACE, we were able to have a simplification of the software deployment management with more granularity and flexibility."
"The most valuable feature of SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is version control. For example, if we began on the first of the month and we considered that as the configuration of the server, I could set that configuration as my baseline. On a daily basis, if there was the operations team that did, for example, server patching, the tool will maintain all levels of versions."
"The product’s alert feature is good. We receive notifications whenever some failures occur in the configuration."
"It just doesn't handle software updates well at all by itself. You need to be a scripting wizard to make those happen properly, or you use third-party tools. The Windows feature updates are very difficult to implement. I would like to see a proprietary built-in remote control tool. I know that they have Team Viewer integrated, but it is not seamless. It would be nice if they had a seamless remote desktop capability directly from the Intune console."
"Intune's reporting and logging could be improved. When troubleshooting, it's difficult to collect the logs and determine what's happening. If I want to filter out the compliant devices, I can see it from the logs, but I would like the option to drill down further."
"It should be simplified. I've worked with many different mobile device management solutions, and Intune is one of the more complex ones. It could be more simplified, and some of it is related to the wording that is being used, such as a configuration profile versus a policy. They really should have had different names to make it less confusing."
"The reporting could be improved, as it's pretty poor compared to other products of this type."
"Intune's third-party patch management could be better. It should be easier for the average system admin to keep non-Microsoft applications updated."
"The mobile and tablet-based versions need improvement because they are not completely user-friendly, compared to the web version. Also, data synchronization with our existing asset manager, the synchronization between multiple assets and multiple devices, takes a lot of time due to the security scanning. It should be reduced."
"There is still a gap between SCCM and Intune, especially in the reporting, inventory, and software deployment areas."
"There is room for improvement, particularly in terms of compatibility, extending beyond the well-known major brands."
"I still need better communication about which processes are really due and which processes are currently being processed. According to the initial setup service provider, there is still no real management or overview on KACE where you can really see 100 percent of what is going on as well as what is going to be processed next and whether I can influence the overall process. It could really help me if I knew, e.g. exactly in 10 minutes my colleague will be supplied with this or that software. I haven't found this yet. If they could add this, that would be cool. It is still missing and I haven't yet found something like this."
"The KACE Go Mobile App crashes a lot, and it always has. I would love to see that get fixed because it's very convenient when it does work properly, but most of the time it does not."
"Easier integration would be beneficial."
"I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."
"The solution needs to have the ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way."
"I would like them to implement VBScript language in KACE Systems Management. Currently, we can only use PowerShell."
"Paying for the product should come with full and extended training anytime it is needed."
"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."
"The product’s support services and licensing models need improvement."
"In a feature release, they could enhance the reporting. However, we have not evaluated this part of the solution extensively."
More Quest KACE Systems Management Pricing and Cost Advice →
More SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor Pricing and Cost Advice →
Quest KACE Systems Management is ranked 10th in Configuration Management with 38 reviews while SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is ranked 17th in Configuration Management with 2 reviews. Quest KACE Systems Management is rated 8.8, while SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Quest KACE Systems Management writes "Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor writes "Useful version control, high availability, and scales well". Quest KACE Systems Management is most compared with Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, BigFix, Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform and Automox, whereas SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor is most compared with HashiCorp Terraform. See our Quest KACE Systems Management vs. SolarWinds Server Configuration Monitor 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.
