Kaseya VSA Reviews

Certainly, our company is a Managed Service Provider (MSP) supporting multiple organizations in Australia. We use IT Glue for comprehensive documentation, including password storage and sharing. Additionally, we use RMM for remote support, job scheduling, and script execution on devices for effective patching.

I like the features of Kaseya VSA, including IT Glue, RMM, and DATTO backup tool. The backup tool is highly useful, offering a fast and efficient way to retrieve and restore data. The solution is also adaptable to various environments and is highly-customizable for client needs.

The stability of the solution is good but it can be improved.

I have been working with the solution for the past year.

The solution is stable. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The solution is scalable. We manage around eighty clients, each with a minimum of thirty to forty devices, for the solution.I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

My advice for those using it is to have a minimum understanding of what they need from the tool. Learning about the tool through training videos is essential. It's not just a remote support tool. It also includes IT and security aspects. Regularly going through updates and training videos is crucial for effective usage. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

It would be impossible to do our job without the solution or a similar product. It helps us get to multiple endpoints in multiple sites in multiple counties.

There's a certain level of management above which we have to get permission to access the machines. Below that, we can just access them. The person using the machine does not have to allow us to access their machine. Otherwise, it would consume an awful lot of time to get permission. We cannot do that with senior management. The senior management gets a prompt on their screen, and they click on it to give us access. We can schedule the patching of the endpoints. It is brilliant.

Sometimes, the product misinterprets the functionality of a machine. Sometimes, the product would restart mission-critical machines after patching, which shouldn’t be done without the engineer’s permission.

I have been implementing the solution for five years. I am working with the latest version of the solution.

I rate the stability a five out of ten. We did not face any issues with the stability.

We have 200 to 300 endpoints. Our customers are medium-sized businesses.

It is a cloud-based solution that talks to an agent. I sign on to a portal, and the portal shows me all the endpoints, like the servers and workstations. The deployment takes weeks. However, we do not have to work on it continuously.

I rate the pricing an eight out of ten on a scale where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

If someone can afford the solution, I would recommend it to them. Overall, I rate the product a five out of ten.

Being able to connect to client computers without them necessarily needing to be there and being able to put in the patches and manage different information systems is valuable.

Feature-wise, it is pretty robust. It is pretty easy to use. It is easy to set up schedules and connect to clients, and I'm pretty happy with it.

The way it is laid out can be improved. If it could be a little more intuitive, it might be a little bit easier. Sometimes, it is hard to find features because they're called something weird, or they're in an interesting location that you wouldn't have thought that they'd be in.

We have been using it for about a month or two since we opened our doors. Our techs will access it, and when we have customers, they'll get into the different computer systems and be able to get in there.

It has been really stable. I haven't had any issues with it.

There is really no setup. You just log in. There is also no maintenance.

I've been pretty impressed with it so far. It is a good system. It is fairly intuitive.  You just have to learn it. It has a pretty good learning curve, and you need to spend the time to really get to know the system well.

I would rate it a nine out of ten. It is pretty good.

We use Kaseya VSA for simulation for customers also using the service.

Kaseya VSA's best features are auditing and reporting.

Kaseya VSA could be improved with more features to support the latest operating systems. In the next release, Kaseya should include mobile device management.

I've been using Kaseya VSA for over a year.

Kaseya VSA is stable.

Kaseya VSA is scalable.

The initial setup was straightforward and took about a week.

We used Kaseya for the deployment.

Licensing is available on a yearly basis and is priced per node.

Before implementing Kaseya VSA, I'd recommend reviewing the white papers and data sheets that Kaseya has produced and requesting a demo so you can review and utilize what the solution has and can produce in your environment. I would give Kaseya VSA a rating of eight out of ten.

We are service providers. We use this solution to deploy our services to our customers.

The most valuable part of this solution is the security features that it offers.

I would like to see more features included that are related to security. We are a company that is selling solutions for security and our customers often ask for more security features.

If you compare with other products, Manage Engine has some features that we like but are not present in Kaseya.

Kaseya VSA is installed on the cloud.

The dollar exchange rate in Brazil is very high, so the price should be better for our country. 

More generally, the pricing could be better in the different regions.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We use Kaseya VSA for software and patch management.

I like the remote control, audit, inventory, patch management, software management, and monitoring features.

The agent-based monitoring solution can be improved. I think they need to be updated. The remote control feature could be better. It would also help if they had a mobile device management feature.

I've been working with Kaseya VSA for more than a year.

Sometimes patching is unreliable. I haven't encountered any other issues.

Technical support is good. If I have inquiries, issues, or a troubleshooting encounter, I can raise a ticket on their website and ask for support. 

On a scale from one to five, I will give technical support a four. 

I gave them a four because they don't always fix the issues that I encounter. For example, they suggest fixing the problem on the next version or the next enhancement.

The initial setup was difficult for me. It would help if you had the license and SQL driver for onboarding successfully.  

I think it costs more than ManageEngine.

I can still recommend this product. It'll help do technical tasks like remote control, patching, monitoring, audit, or inventory. You can also monitor devices in the production or the company's environment. But it's not a perfect solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Kaseya VSA an eight.

We use this solution for remote management.

The most valuable feature is remote management. It is quite robust.

The training that we received was quite good.

I am having an issue with patch deployment. With a lot of people working remotely right now, it is difficult to deploy patches because most of my clients are not on the office network. I have been looking for a way to deploy patches via the internet to selected equipment from Kaseya VSA, but it seems impossible. This is something that I would like to have support for in a future release.

Kaseya seems to download Windows patches, although I have not found a way to select those patches that I want to roll out, as it is done in the System Center. In SCCM, you can select the specific patches that you want to roll out. The only option I have seen is to approve or deny all of the patches that are available.

The workflow is not quite straightforward.

I have been working with Kaseya VSA for between seven and eight months.

I would say that because it does the job, it is stable. I don't use it every day, but so far, I haven't had any problems.

We have about 200 users that are a combination of administrators, developers, and end-users. They do not work on it directly, but we capture the information from the endpoints on the developer's system.

We had two training sessions with the support staff and they were good. The sessions were recorded and I quite enjoyed them. Personally, I don't like to contact technical support and would rather research the problem myself. If I hit an obstacle then I will contact support.

Overall, the support is good and I am happy with it.

I have experience with Microsoft System Center and there are some things that are easier to do with it.

I was not present for the initial setup, as it was in place before I joined the organization.

I have not tried automating any of the processes, although I have watched some videos and it seems to be straightforward.

My advice for anybody who is considering Kaseya VSA is to run a proof of concept first so that they have a fair idea of what they're going into.

Overall, I think that it is a good product and I may just have to better find my way around it.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for remote management and remote control.

The remote management is quite good. Also, the patch management and service desk are great features of the solution.

Although the service desk is good, it's not obvious. It's not easy to know exactly how the system is working and there's the possibility that we are not using some features as we should. 

The management of patches also needs improvement. There are two ways to do that in the solution now, but one, the oldest one, as far as we have found, is working better than the newest one and this has created some problems. You should be able to handle the management of patches not only from Microsoft but also from other vendors. 

Some configurations and abilities from the system are not of use. The solution should offer webinars or some sort of training offerings to help users learn what the system can do and how it can be done.

It would be useful, in the future, if there was a way to maintain another device's firewalls for simple switches.

In general, the stability has been good.

On the cloud deployment model, scalability is very easy. We currently have four to five techs on our solution.

Technical support is good. It can always be improved.

The initial setup is not complex if you use the cloud deployment model. There are some configurations that are not easy to find. You may also not know what the impact on the system will be if you change configurations. In general, the basic items are easy, but if you want anything beyond the standard setup, it's a little bit complex.

The time it takes to deploy the solution depends on the organization. In our case, we did a migration, but if you just start from zero, probably it's easier. For us, with the migration, deployment took about three or four weeks.

You need two people for deployment.

We handled the implementation ourselves.

We used to use the on-premises deployment model, but we have since moved to the cloud.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.