IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

ManageEngine Desktop Central OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

ManageEngine Desktop Central is #1 ranked solution in top Client Desktop Management tools and #4 ranked solution in top Enterprise Mobility Management (EMM) tools. PeerSpot users give ManageEngine Desktop Central an average rating of 8 out of 10. ManageEngine Desktop Central is most commonly compared to Microsoft Intune: ManageEngine Desktop Central vs Microsoft Intune. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a comms service provider, accounting for 30% of all views.
What is ManageEngine Desktop Central?

What is ManageEngine Desktop Central?

ManageEngine Desktop Central is a desktop management solution that offers a central management system for desktops, servers, laptops, smartphones, and tablets. It is a unified endpoint management (UEM) solution that can be scaled according to each organization's needs. Desktop Central is a modern approach to traditional desktop management services in that it offers in-depth and customizable options for regular endpoint management routines regarding automating software deployment, installing patches, and deploying OS.

In addition to automating endpoint management routines, ManageEngine Desktop Central offers management of assets and software licenses, management of USB device usage, monitoring of software usage statistics, and more. The solution supports Mac, Windows, and Linux operating systems, and users can manage all of their iOS, Windows, and Android devices, including smartphones and tablets, from a single console. Users can also apply restrictions on camera usage, application installations, and browsers while securing devices by requiring a passcode.

Benefits of ManageEngine Desktop Central

ManageEngine Desktop Central offers many benefits for users looking for a centralized desktop management solution. These benefits include:

  • Software management: Using thousands of preset application templates, users can deploy software to all endpoints within their network in a few clicks.
  • Endpoint security: Users can strengthen their endpoint security by monitoring browsers, controlling devices and applications in their network, and continuously evaluating vulnerabilities.
  • Configurations: Desktop Central offers more than 25 preset configurations, including Security Policies, Power Management, etc.
  • Patch Management: Automate patch deployment to secure enterprise networks.
  • IT Asset Management: Track warranty details and licensing while managing hardware and software resources in the network.
  • Remote Control: Remote desktops can be troubleshot with multi-user collaboration, video recording, file transfer, and more.
  • Mobile Device Management: Mobile devices can be centrally managed and configured securely.
  • Modern Management: Users can unify endpoint management using a similar approach by managing Windows 10 devices and mobile phones.
  • OS Imaging and Deployment: Users can automatically image and deploy OS software on Windows devices.

Reviews from Real Users

Users love ManangeEngine Desktop Central because of its ability to manage thousands of desktops from a central location.

A manager of information technology at an engineering company writes, "It's a complete product that allows you to remote troubleshoot, has an inventory of systems."

An IT systems manager at Algorythma notes, "The most important feature we found to be useful in the COVID situation is the secure connection, which gives the IT support staff the ability to seamlessly connect with the users remotely and in a secure way."

ManageEngine Desktop Central was previously known as Desktop Central, ManageEngine Desktop Management MSP.

ManageEngine Desktop Central Buyer's Guide

Download the ManageEngine Desktop Central Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: April 2022

ManageEngine Desktop Central Customers

Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Strathallan School, BMI Healthcare, Comercial Kywi, First Priority Federal Credit Union, Gerab National Enterprises

ManageEngine Desktop Central Video

ManageEngine Desktop Central Pricing Advice

What users are saying about ManageEngine Desktop Central pricing:
  • "The pricing is very low, compared to other products. Compared to Intune or SCCM, it's much less. I can say it's a good product for less of a price."
  • "The solution is very affordable."
  • ManageEngine Desktop Central Reviews

    Filter by:
    Filter Reviews
    Industry
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Company Size
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Job Level
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Rating
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Considered
    Loading...
    Filter Unavailable
    Order by:
    Loading...
    • Date
    • Highest Rating
    • Lowest Rating
    • Review Length
    Search:
    Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
    Saranraj Kumar - PeerSpot reviewer
    Senior Modern Workplace Expert at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Useful for patching and software deployment, but needs a proactive remediation feature
    Pros and Cons
    • "One of the benefits of Desktop Central is it made the provisioning process simpler because now we have a provisioning package. We have around 1,500 laptops at the moment and all these PCs were provisioned by a provisioning package. In the provisioning package, we have integrated every aspect of renaming, deploying applications, patching, etc., so we simply execute the provisioning package and as soon as it's executed, it will install the management agent. Once the agent is installed, it will take care of all the tasks, so we don't have to sit in front of the computer to prepare the machine. This really helps us to provision the PC quickly with our agent."
    • "ManageEngine could be improved by giving customers an option to perform certain actions proactively. Since I was a consultant, I worked on different products and some had advantages over ManageEngine. For example, proactive remediation—you want to proactively check something on the computers and run the script. In ManageEngine, you have the option to run the script, but Intune has the option to do so proactively. ManageEngine doesn't have this. You should have the option to act proactively, not just going ahead and fixing it once it's done. Proactive remediation should be a feature."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have two main use cases of Desktop Central. The first is patching, because we want to keep our systems secure. We install Microsoft security updates using ManageEngine Desktop Central every month. The second case is to deploy applications. We want to install applications to the machines from a central location. Also, we want to give access to users so they can install whatever applications they need using the self-service portal option. When there is a common application used by many users, we publish it to the self-service portal so users can install it themselves instead of contacting local IT. Those are our two main use cases of ManageEngine, but we also use it for other tasks, such as remote connection. Our local IT uses two products: ManageEngine Desktop Central and TeamViewer. We use both to connect to the remote machines. 

    We have the on-premise version, but we are looking to move forward to the cloud version once they start supporting data migration—at the moment, they don't support it. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    One of the benefits of Desktop Central is it made the provisioning process simpler because now we have a provisioning package. We have around 1,500 laptops at the moment and all these PCs were provisioned by a provisioning package. In the provisioning package, we have integrated every aspect of renaming, deploying applications, patching, etc., so we simply execute the provisioning package and as soon as it's executed, it will install the management agent. Once the agent is installed, it will take care of all the tasks, so we don't have to sit in front of the computer to prepare the machine. This really helps us to provision the PC quickly with our agent. 

    Now, we are going to do a PC refresh. It's a big project for next year. We are going to replace all of our PCs—1,500 PCs—with a new one, for all the users, so we have big requirements for ManageEngine. ManageEngine does a lot of scripting work in the backend—including renaming the computer according to our conventions, distributing applications, patching—so when we prepare the machine, we want everything to be installed and ready to give to the user. We don't want to wait or take more time, so we've now combined ManageEngine with Microsoft's Autopilot and Intune to provision the PCs. PC provisioning is made easier with ManageEngine. 

    Another benefit is we have the option to pilot updates with some machines before distributing them to production, and this can be completely automated. We don't have to create said task every time for testing and deployment, so once we scope it, it relieves the time we spend each month deploying patches. It regularly runs in our schedule with the reboot options. We give reboot notifications in a user-friendly manner to employees, with the option to postpone the reboot. This relieves the time that we spend with end users since it's user-friendly. 

    What is most valuable?

    One of the most valuable features is patching. They support third-party patching as well, so we don't have to use another product. They support both Microsoft and third-party updates, and this is one of the main functionalities that we use regularly. 

    The software deployment feature is also valuable because, once in a while, we need to distribute applications, such as VCO, Office applications, etc. For example, when we prepare a PC for users. We use ManageEngine to perform lots of tasks. 

    We also have the option to deploy scripts via ManageEngine. We use some scripts that are to be deployed during the machines' provisioning, to make sure our machines are renamed properly according to the naming conventions we want. For example, for the France region, we want FRP, France Paris, and then the serial number. We want to deploy some script that renames the PC after the machine is provisioned, and we also want to deploy background images, logon screen, logout screen, etc. So we deploy all these policies using ManageEngine.

    What needs improvement?

    ManageEngine could be improved by giving customers an option to perform certain actions proactively. Since I was a consultant, I worked on different products and some had advantages over ManageEngine. For example, proactive remediation—you want to proactively check something on the computers and run the script. In ManageEngine, you have the option to run the script, but Intune has the option to do so proactively. ManageEngine doesn't have this. You should have the option to act proactively, not just going ahead and fixing it once it's done. Proactive remediation should be a feature. 

    Another thing is, with PC provisioning, they have to make it in a modern way. They have deployment, but it's a very outdated process right now. It's a modern workplace, so you have to provision a PC live, on the go—it's not that you create images and then distribute the image to the machines. Many customers are not using this and, in fact, we are not using it. We use a modern way of PC provisioning. So they have to concentrate on that more. 

    There are small glitches, but it's not going to stop you from using the product. For example, when you open the configuration, you may not see the details, but if you refresh the page, you will see them. There are small glitches here and there that we can see. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I began using this solution about a year ago. In the past, I implemented this solution for different customers, but now I am an end user.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    This solution is very stable. It depends on the size of the company, though. For us, it's very stable because we don't have many machines. The overall count is 1,800 to 1,900 machines—our license is for 2,050, but we've currently only utilized 1,900. So our infrastructure is medium-sized, I would say. If you go for 10,000, 20,000, you might have some lagging in the performance, but I'm not sure. 

    It doesn't really require much maintenance. You just keep it as you want and regularly do a cleanup of old applications—when you delete, you have a new version of the package, so you might want to clean up the old packages—and that's it. You have automatic cleanup functionalities in the product itself. For example, if you download an update for this month and, after three months, none of the machines require this patch anymore, it automatically cleans up. You have some settings to enable so that you don't have to manually work on the cleanup. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    This solution is very easy to scale. We are trying to create lots of virtual machines in Azure Virtual Desktop, so we might increase our machines by another 100 or 200. 

    How are customer service and support?

    ManageEngine's support is one of the best, I would say. We have chat support, so I can immediately ping someone in support, from my end product console, and get assistance very quickly. If I have a question, I can ask them directly; if I have technical questions, I can ask them, and they will provide an answer right away. If I write an email, it will take three to four hours. Since I was a support engineer before, I don't normally raise questions, but when I do, I normally get quick replies. Because it's a one-to-one chat, you get immediate responses from the chat window. 

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    In the past, when I first joined this company, we were using WSUS to patch all of our machines, but we didn't have any control over what patches were installed. We didn't have a proper reporting aspect in WSUS—we could have, but it's very complicated. We'd have to connect the information using SQL Server and pull the information, and that's lots of querying. But with ManageEngine, it's explicit. You go and collect the reports as you want, such as the number of patches installed on a machine or how many machines got a particular update. We even have the option to uninstall patches once they're installed, so we can go back to the previous patch version of the application. 

    Another drawback with WSUS is that you don't have the option to scale a reboot. With ManageEngine, we can give reboot notifications in a user-friendly manner to employees, with the option to postpone, and after a certain number of days, you can reboot forcefully. This relieves the time that we spend with end users, who now get a pop-up. You don't have many options with WSUS, but with ManageEngine, you do. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The deployment process is very easy. It's a combined product, so when you install the Desktop Central EXE, you install the database on the same machine, as well as the web server components like Apache Tomcat and Observer. Basically, when you install the EXE, you just click "next," "next," "next," and then it's done. It's not a big deployment. In terms of planning, you might need a little bit of time, but that's it. It's a half-day or one-day task, not like SCCM where you have to spend a lot of effort and there are lots of technical guides, technical architectural documents, etc. So it's very user-friendly in terms of deployment, I would say. 

    The number of people involved in deployment depends on the size of the company. As I was a consultant before, I worked with two people, sometimes with one to six people. So it depends on the company. For example, in our company, we have only two people who manage the platform. To be honest, I cannot say that only one person can install this solution. 

    For us, the deployment took two to three days, but it's not a continuous three days. We installed the server component and we installed the distribution server component after two days. So on the whole, we would've spent two to three days, maximum. 

    What about the implementation team?

    We implemented through an in-house team. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is very low, compared to other products. Compared to Intune or SCCM, it's much less. I can say it's a good product for less of a price. 

    Intune doesn't really have a price, at the moment, because they integrated Intune with another license for Microsoft. If you purchase M365, you get the license. They've made everything a combo now, so obviously any company will go for M365, which includes everything. That's what our company has, and we don't pay anything extra for it. If you split the money, it would be much less than Desktop Central, so you can't technically compare the two. 

    ManageEngine's licensing is not as good. They add new features and they ask for money. For example, they introduced Browser Security, which is an extra add-on. Compared to Intune, you just buy the Intune product and that's it, you have everything in place—browser security, endpoint management, etc. Everything's included with the Intune license, which isn't the case with ManageEngine. That's something they really need to take care of. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We also use Intune, which offers many functionalities since it's integrated with Office 365. In terms of the experience, it's very light, but since ManageEngine is a completely different product, you have to integrate a lot of things. For example, installing the ManageEngine agent to all the machines if you want to onboard them. In comparison, with Intune, normally when you prepare the machine, it's automatically included, so onboarding is easy. 

    Also, since Intune is a cloud service, you don't need to manage any infrastructure and you don't need a server to host the solution. With Desktop Central, you need a server, and that server should be managed by someone else as well, like a GDC team, a server team. 

    Both solutions have advantages and disadvantages. For example, creating packages in ManageEngine is easier than Intune. In Intune, you have to create a package and convert it to a package format supported by Intune. In ManageEngine, you can create EXE or MSI—both are supported—and you just upload and create the package. 

    What other advice do I have?

    ManageEngine Desktop Central is a product that's worth the money. It's easy to install and quicker in action. If you start installing the product today, in a small environment, you will be able to deploy the application in two hours. 

    I rate ManageEngine a seven out of ten. They have a lot of improvements to make. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Abbasi Poonawala - PeerSpot reviewer
    Vice President Derivatives Ops IT at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Patch and upgrade many devices simultaneously in a DevSecOps pipeline which is effective but demanding on resources
    Pros and Cons
    • "The most valuable in Desktop Central is the way it is tightly coupled with the rest of the modules and the entire gamut of ManageEngine."
    • "The performance sometimes lags a bit because the solution is demanding on system resources."
    • "The pricing is lower than other well-respected solutions in this category."

    What is our primary use case?

    I am certified for two of the modules of ManageEngine. I am a certified associate for AD Manager Plus (Active Directory Management) and I also have the certification for Desktop Central. Desktop Central is a management module used to manage devices and services from one location.  

    To manage a large number of users and devices and push upgrades and patches, we need a solution that allows us to do that in an efficient way. We can do this with Microsoft Active Directory. That would be our primary use case for this solution. There are other things that we do with it.   

    If we want to track an incident more closely to do some root-cause analysis, Desktop Central can help us with this.  

    If I have a large group or area of a company that extends into EMEA (Europe, the Middle East, and Africa) and APAC (Asia-Pacific) and maybe LATAM (Latin America) that is on Windows 7 and I want to upgrade multiple devices to Windows 10, I can plan for these upgrades and do them simultaneously. Desktop Central has certain use cases within IT, Ops, and DevSecOps (security as a part of software development and IT operations) roles. Using these you can build a DevSecOps pipeline using Desktop Central.  

    In the case of a well-formed pipeline, the Ops is given the liberty to do the releases rather than having to get IT involved at multiple locations. With minimal help, the Ops can do the releases, they just have to define the release and the release goes out smoothly without any IT intervention. The automation process can be built out this way to give technical control to non-technical users. We built our own platform for doing that from scratch Java based. But the technology matured and there are more options available from vendors to solve these issues. We chose to deploy Desktop Centeral as our dedicated solution.  

    How has it helped my organization?

    It has greatly simplified updating and patching within our systems.  

    What is most valuable?

    From my hands-on experience, the features I have found the most valuable in Desktop Central is the way it is tightly coupled with the rest of the modules and the entire gamut of ManageEngine. So if I want to collect data about who the users are on the system, I can pull that from the Active Directory. The AD Workbench is a dashboard that gives all the data about the users enterprise-wide.  

    Desktop Central has got a dedicated mobile device management module. ManageEngine has got the complete gamut of offerings. It has got asset management, service management, and asset classification. It can do any kind of patch management. It is best at the general management of assets and reporting.  

    For example, we can use it for virtually anything having to do with security on endpoints. Say we have maybe 4,000-plus devices that we have to monitor and upgrade the OSS (Operations Support Systems) and apply patching. This can all be handled with Desktop Central from a central location. That is what makes it a very good option.  

    Desktop Central manages pushing upgrades to endpoints and how to securely manage those endpoints. That is how it is most useful.  

    What needs improvement?

    The product has several places where there is room for improvement.  

    Although it is on the cloud, sometimes the performance is slower than it should be. One of the reasons could be that it is tightly integrated and tight coupled with the rest of the modules and all of them have to be in sync. This syncing takes time and resources. When I go to our Desktop Central console, sometimes it runs slowly. So performance is one place where it could have room for improvement.  

    In terms of patching, which is a major benefit of the package, patch management can work even better as well. The vulnerabilities are obvious. Every day we get reports on a lot of new vulnerabilities. It is clear that ManageEngine is doing the patching and the package is easily deployed once they are developed and available. The incident management, the root cause, the planning of the resolution, the service management — all these things are known and available. The team at ManageEngine is good at that. But they do not provide reports to user admins on the development and delivery which is information they already have and admins could use. Once the patch is added to the repository the defense against vulnerabilities improves. But the information about developments and vulnerabilities would be good to have and could be shared more candidly.  

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been working with Desktop Central since February 2020, so that is about 2 years now.  

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The product is constantly being upgraded by the vendor for any known issues with some features or some bugs. That kind of stability issue will always be temporary.  

    There can be minor bugs that linger because they are not affecting operational issues, but even these can be escalated for fixing. We can get it fixed through the support and the product team for that. We talk directly to the product team if we feel something is important. It can happen over the phone, or it can happen by email. The entire product team has got different account managers for each of their customers. We can go directly to the team professionals that we need and get a bug fix and get it applied.  

    Although Desktop Central is performing well, it sometimes experiences lag because of the resources available. The CPU and memory available might be temporarily low. Desktop Central needs a lot of resources to perform its services and syncing.  

    Overall we have not had any serious, lingering issues with stability.  

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We have not had any issues overall with any type of scalability. Right now we might have more than 12,000, 15,000-plus users spread across the geography. We can add more.  

    All the service management gets taken care of by Desktop Central, which monitors everything. So if you need to expand services you configure this in Desktop Central. There are business KPIs (Key Performance Indicators), so it is KPI driven. How many incidents we are expecting, how much we can scale and all these system variables can be driven by business KPIs.  

    Quest Office has a product called Foglight that has been used for quite a long time to order business KPIs. There are two different types of KPIs: the business KPIs, and then the functional or technical KPIs. So those are all integrated with Desktop Central from Foglight.  

    We have incident management through Alacrity which is made by a different segment of BMC Software which has also got the product called Remedy. Alacrity is something similar.  

    Within Desktop Central there is a production management function that is at the core of the application. When we configure Alacrity to care for incident management or Foglight to manage KPIs, this becomes integrated with the Desktop Central modules.  

    We can tightly integrate other applications to the Desktop Central solution and expand out what it oversees and interacts with.  

    If the workload increases, we can scale services easily on the cloud or make other plans for enhancing our architecture.  

    How are customer service and support?

    I am quite satisfied with the customer support. They have bigger support teams available and the routing to the proper people and resources is quite good. They have support out of different cities, so they 'follow the sun' from the perspective of support and the availability is quite good all the time.  

    How would you rate customer service and support?

    Neutral

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    VMware was our solution at first. It was a PaaS (Platform as a Service) offering with built-in security and a part of vCloud Air. Workspace ONE was on the top of that. It was the first real desktop virtualization. Like Citrix, it gives you VDI (Virtual Desktop Infrastructure). With that, VMs can easily be managed through Workspace ONE and integrated VDIs.  

    If I already have VMware and vSphere as my core backbone for the virtualization strategy in the organization, I might also look at automation for deploying updates. If I have a containerized application that is not automated, I can build in the automation using the DevSecOps pipeline or I can look for another solution. If you want to do the DevSecOps pipeline in the VMware workspace, you can do that with vRealize automation.  

    VMware, compared to Desktop Central, is far more expensive. Desktop Central has got a license and pricing advantage similar to your windows update and Windows WUSP (Windows Update Services: Client-Server Protocol). That is your Windows update platform. With Desktop Central, you pay something similar to that. It is only a few dollars per license per user.  

    Switching to Desktop Central was a matter of having an opportunity to make a switch, keeping aware of the developments in the technology and on the market, and moving to a product that was cheaper and had the capabilities that we needed to carry out the task.   

    How was the initial setup?

    Our process and roll out for doing the setups are pretty easy. We have managed to gain familiarity with the product and created a pretty smooth process for the installations.  

    I have installed a lot of modules by myself, like EDI Manager, and I even installed Desktop Central. We run tests until we are satisfied that these two modules are installed correctly and this usually does not take much time.  

    What about the implementation team?

    We do not necessarily handle the setup and deployment totally by ourselves. We stay connected to the managing and support team. There are different product teams within the managing team. There is one for EDI (Electronic Data Interchange) Manager, there is one for Desktop Central, there is another one for the service management. There are many different parts at the support team level. Most of the installations do not require assistance but we can consult support when required. They will help us cope with any sticking point and we can move on from there.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Desktop Central can be less expensive than other solutions like VMware for managing DevSecOps. You have to pay per asset with Desktop Central and the final cost depends on how many assets you have across the organization. Per asset, the license cost will be less than using a more expensive license for VMware and vRealize. I think per desktop it might be somewhere around $50 or $100 each using ManageEngine.  

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    This is the only product I have in mind for this type of solution currently, although we have not evaluated Sophos yet. After that, there is only Citrix and VM Workspace ONE. Citrix is the oldest vendor we have had since Citrix MetaFrame Presentations Server days. At that time they were using screen sharing on desktops, RDPs (Remote Desktop Protocol), and still using all those older technologies. So that is too old as a solution. Desktop Central is doing much better things and has advanced well beyond that solution.  

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice to people looking into this solution is that if you want to improve on the patching processes as a part of a DevSecOps pipeline, Desktop Central can help you do that. It will help you make that workflow easier and it is a better option than other solutions. So this works out to be a better because everything is built-in. You do not have to integrate with any other company's portal or any other incident management or tracking.  

    If you plan for a patch, there are different tools to use, different notifications to set for the patch, and they can be administered within Desktop Central itself. So the admin can approve it and once the notification changes, the patch can be released to the endpoints. That works pretty fast. That built-in workflow makes it more productive and easier to use.  

    On a scale from one to ten, where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Desktop Central higher than the VMware and Citrix Workspaces. The workflows are much better and easier, and the different roles for IT and Ops are well defined. So I would rate somewhere around seven.  

    It is a seven because it still has got some room for improvement, but I think seven is good.  

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    Public Cloud
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Buyer's Guide
    ManageEngine Desktop Central
    April 2022
    Learn what your peers think about ManageEngine Desktop Central. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2022.
    596,970 professionals have used our research since 2012.
    Vinod Pardeshi - PeerSpot reviewer
    Assistant Manager - IT at MEP Infrastructure Developers Ltd.
    Real User
    Top 20
    Easy to used with good centralized patch management and remote troubleshooting capabilities
    Pros and Cons
    • "Everything is easily centralized and managed under this one product."
    • "I would like to see them come out with a SaaS version of the product in the future."

    What is our primary use case?

    We primarily use the solution for managing patches and centralizing updates for applications. We can also blacklist and whitelist applications on our users' laptops.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Besides the office and operating systems, there are lots of other products that need to be taken care of, which are beyond your control. I have 250 endpoints here, sitting here and 100 roaming users, so for me, each and every application in the current scenario is very difficult, wherein the digital signatures are happening, the tokens are happening, which ask for the updates of Java, which ask for the update of a browser. It is very difficult for me to do the update of every PC individually. However, when handled in a centralized location, I get the control I need so that I can see which endpoint needs to be updated, which endpoint has been updated, et cetera. This is very helpful for me, very good.

    What is most valuable?

    The solution is very easy to use.

    Everything is easily centralized and managed under this one product.

    When we do the patching, I can select the applications which are applicable to my network. We will get multiple templates and tons and tons of applications, however, you can select and download and it'll start patching. It'll consume lots of bandwidth and disk space. What you can do, is that, whichever applications are applicable for you, you can select those applications and it will start patching only those applications. It will reduce the bandwidth, it'll reduce the disk space, and tracking will be much easier.

    In terms of the warranty, you need to install the agent on the laptop, or desktop and once the agent is installed, when the communication happens, it fetches the entire detail of the hardware, software, and everything. The beautiful thing with that is it gives you the warranty information also, whether the product is out of warranty or not. I can set an alert for devices where the warranty is going to expire. I'll get an alert that it is going to expire in one year, a month, six months, whatever the term I defined.

    Since I'm able to see whatever the applications are installed on the user's PC on the endpoint. Sometimes most of the roaming users who are out of my network tend to install applications that are not applicable as per company policy. You can define which applications are allowed. There was a couple of cases where my users had installed a YouTube Downloader, and while downloading and installing that filter, by default or by accident, they installed some of the adware also. That won't happen under this solution.

    Desktop Central gives me an option wherein I can prohibit any software. When I blacklist software, the user will get an alert saying "This is prohibited software." Then they call IT and I'll get a notification. For me, I'm very much in control of my network now. I have the power of whitelisting or blacklisting.

    For users that work from home and are not in the office, sometimes minor things happen, such as email not working properly, et cetera. Desktop Central will give me remote control of a user's machine and I can troubleshoot or find out what the issue might be. If something needs to be installed, I can do it remotely as well. I don't need to buy TeamViewer or AnyDesk or other software. 

    There are so many features available to us. They've added a lot over time. Initially, the asset management was there, however, there were no warranty features. The remote control was there, however, there were various limitations. They've just gotten better and more robust over time. 

    What needs improvement?

    For the most part, all of my needs are met with this product.

    I would like to see them come out with a SaaS version of the product in the future. There are dependencies with on-prem. For example, since it's on my data center, my bandwidth, it is totally dependent on my network. On the cloud, I don't have to worry about anything. 

    One feature we're testing is when we have a laptop with just a DOS OS and we need to do a full installation, including installing the underlying OS. I'd like to have the option where we could create a template to allow the system to install the OS with the typical software. It's a feature we're testing now to see if this is possible. We don't use it yet. However, I'd like it if we could just run one script, one command, and then get an alert when the process is done so that I can go in and configure emails or whatever else I need so that it is ready for the end-user.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been working with the solution for around three years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability is very good. We have been using it for the last three to four years and there is not a single downtime where the product has failed. In terms of service updates, service backups, and whatever the features are coming, we have faced a 99.9% success ratio.

    In the initial stage, at that time, we had a hybrid environment internally, where we had Windows 7, Windows 8, Windows 10, and some of the servers which had Windows 2003 OS. There were compatibility issues, however, we've since migrated and upgraded the systems and there is no longer an issue.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is scalable.

    We are using the solution quite extensively and have about 250 users.

    How are customer service and support?

    Technical support has been good and we've been satisfied with their level of service. They have a good inbuilt chat option if you need to reach them. They have a technical team right within the solution that you can talk to in real-time. They can provide workarounds or escalate issues quite easily.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    We used to have a Windows SUS server for patch management. There were other products that needed to be taken care of - for example, Adobe, the WinRAR, and multiple other software, which needed to be patched, and in which the assets needed to be managed. There are things such as warranties that need to be managed, and their tracking needs to be done, we were looking for an application wherein we would get everything on a centralized product, which is why we chose this solution.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup was straightforward. At the time, when we were in the phase of testing for the product, we did whatever testing to fulfill our requirements. That way, when we went into production, there were not any hiccups.

    Deployment took around ten to 15 days, due to the number of endpoints that needed to be done, and the number of products that needed to be whitelisted. Also, everything needed to be configured. Around four to five people were involved in that project.

    In terms of maintenance, if there is any product update, or if the application will have any service package coming, then I need to take downtime, to go through everything and do testing of the service pack to see whether it will hamper any current writing process or not. Once I do it in the test environment, then I have to put it in production.

    That said, once we move to SaaS, this process will be obsolete in the cloud.

    I have two dedicated resources for maintenance. That includes me. The other person looks at the patch management and the warranties. I look at server maintenance and deal with whatever resources are required for servers. 

    What about the implementation team?

    We were able to set it up ourselves in-house. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    At the time we signed onto this product, it was a bit more expensive than SolarWinds, however, I'm not sure if that's since changed. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We looked at SolarWinds, however, we went for the Desktop Central. We evaluated it and we found Desktop Central was quite user-friendly in terms of patch management and in terms of asset management. Right from the user inception, until the exit, everything is tracked under Desktop Central, whatever the asset allocated to the user, whatever the warranty, whatever the application, the install, everything is tracked under the Desktop Central.

    Kaseya was also evaluated which was on the cloud. However, it was costlier and there were manageability issues. SolarWinds was a bit very complex in terms of handling. Technical support was also different as they only have an email option.

    What other advice do I have?

    I'm a customer and an end-user.

    Currently, we are using on-prem. I am waiting for SaaS, however, I really don't have the SaaS version. It'll be very good if they offer a SaaS version; my manageability will become very much easier.

    If you're looking for third-party patch management, asset management, and/or remote control support, then this is the best app. For remote control, it doesn't require much bandwidth. Often, people sitting in a remote location are using their 3G data cards or mobile data, mobile phone, and they still got connected with the seamless connectivity. There has been no issue.

    I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    Engineering Technical Lead at a financial services firm with 10,001+ employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Inventory and patch management are solid features
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution is definitely scalable."
    • "Documentation could improve so we don't need to create the support requests first."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our main use case, the core function we are using it for, is Patch Management. We download the patches from the database in the Desktop Central server, then we test the patches in our system and push those patches on the server, Microsoft server and Windows, user machines.

    Inventory Management, Managing Index of Central, was the second main function that we were using to maintain all the records of our servers, laptops, and all the other devices, like Cisco devices and other things on our network. We manage all of our assets through Central.

    We have directory information using User Management, where we sync all users from the Active Directory to Desktop Central to give access to the users.

    We did not use Mobile Device Manager, MDM.

    How has it helped my organization?

    The first benefit that we use Desktop Central for is this: In our audit reports, we have to compile a list of all the vulnerable systems and determine which are healthy systems and which are vulnerable and highly nervous systems. On a quarterly basis, we have to make sure that all the systems are healthy. We categorize all the highly vulnerable systems and install the patches on those using Desktop Central. 

    What is most valuable?

    Patch Management is the most valuable feature of Desktop Central. We have all the information on the patches we are going to push on the systems and which patches are not installed on the server. We know which servers or Windows machines or Linux machines are highly vulnerable. We categorize the machines so if there are any issues on one of the machines, we just take care of those specific machines which are highly vulnerable and take care of the patches which are not installed on those machines. 

    Inventory is also a very good feature of Desktop Central. We don't need to manage all the inventories manually. We just install the Managing Desktop Central agent in all the systems, put down the report request, and download all the reports to share with management. 

    There are many features that we use from Desktop Central, but Inventory Management is a solid feature, and Patch Management is a solid feature.

    What needs improvement?

    One area that could be improved with the solution would be integrations. Sometimes it happens that the agent got corrupted on the systems, and we have to manually uninstall and push it to the systems again. Also, ManageEngine does not recognize systems that are not on our network. For example, one of our employees in another city did not connect his or her laptop to the system for a few months, or just connected to the internet and did not connect to our VPN, so the agent got corrupted or disconnected from our ManageEngine. Then we have to manually ask them to connect to the network. Then we push all the updates.

    That's the only issue we really face with Desktop Central. So if somehow we could connect it through the internet, that would be a great improvement. Right now, if a user is not connected to the VPN or the network and he's outside the country or city, and when he just connects the internet, ManageEngine does not connect to communicate with our server. 

    Regarding additional features, I had created a lot of tickets for feature enhancement, things which were not available in Desktop Central previously, but were noted by the team, developed by the Desktop Central team, and published. For the last year and a half, and I haven't opened any tickets or seen any additional requirements from our side. Desktop Central is very good software.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I worked with this solution for about five years. I have had a great experience with Desktop Central, and I have great knowledge of this product. Five years of experience for one product is sufficient to learn the things under the product.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The performance of Desktop Central is nice. We don't need any high-end servers for Desktop Central; we just install it on a VM, Virtual Machine, the database, gigs, memory, and a few hard discs, and we don't need any high-end CPUs for the Desktop Central support. The performance is good, and it doesn't require any high-end processor.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is definitely scalable. Once you are working on a virtualization environment, it's very simple to scale any product. We can enhance the memory and the processor of the servers.

    We have around 400 or 500 client machines using the solution, and I was the person managing it for the last five years. In the last three months, my colleague has now been taking care of managing Desktop Central.

    How are customer service and support?

    Customer support was great. They were helpful and always responded to my queries, and they help really quickly. I'm very happy with the Desktop Central support team.

    I created a lot of tickets for support and new features. They promptly responded and took care of those issues and how to resolve them. If I don't know how to perform the step, they always send detailed documentation or detailed steps to perform those tasks. The technical support is good. 

    One thing that could be improved is documentation. For example, with Atlassian Jira and Confluence, their documentation is very strong. Desktop Central could improve the documentation so we don't need to create the support requests first; we just go to the documentation, and it should be very simple in words so everyone who is not technical or doesn't have the in-depth knowledge of Desktop Central can easily read and perform those steps. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup of the solution is simple. We have a server on which we set up the Desktop Central server, and we synchronize our active directory with it. Then we push the agents in, on the OUs, and then on all the system got pushed. It only takes a few hours for the initial setup from scratch. 

    The upgrade process is also very simple. We just bring down the system, get the update downloaded to the server, post it on the server, install it, and bring the server up. So that's great, and the agent always upgrades on the systems as well, once the server is upgraded. The upgrades only take a few minutes.

    The validation process is quite long because we have to make sure that it upgrades all the agents on all the client machines. The validation is a lengthy process just to make sure that all the systems are upgraded on the new version of the agent. But the overall process is not very long.

    What about the implementation team?

    I did the deployment of the solution on my own. I always upgrade the server myself, and I was the person who was managing the Desktop Central server and managing the Desktop Service Desk on my own.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The pricing is fine. We purchase a one year agreement and one year support with Desktop Central for 500 users, and the price was fine. We were not charged for any additional costs, except the licensing.

    What other advice do I have?

    I've recommended this product to a few of my colleagues in different companies because I was admiring this product when we need to make sure that all the systems are healthy and patches are installed. It's a very user-friendly product, and anyone can use this product.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    IT Infrastructure and Security Manager at a computer software company with 1-10 employees
    Real User
    Top 20
    Automatic alerts, simple deployment, and easy to scale
    Pros and Cons
    • "ManageEngine Desktop Central automatically alerts you if there are newer releases or updates. You do not have to go to their website and check."
    • "ManageEngine Desktop Central should keep up with some of the features that other major vendors are providing, such as Microsoft."

    What is our primary use case?

    We deployed ManageEngine Desktop Central mainly for the patching of systems. Additionally, we have used it extensively for doing ad hoc software deployments, making changes to systems, such as if we need to deploy a registry fix. The solution also allows us to have local repositories. When we do a deployment at a local operation, everything is deployed locally from within that operation. We do not have to use the network to receive anything.

    We do not use it for remote assistance very much, and the reason is we use ScreenConnect. I know that the Desktop Central remote control works. The other thing that we use Desktop Central is to receive quick access via the command line. It's very convenient that we can open a command prompt on a remote host.

    How has it helped my organization?

    We have seen a lot of benefits in reporting, we are able to pull a lot of information. For example, we can go ahead and pull out a report saying how many Windows 11 machines are in the organization, how many machines are missing patches that are older than 60 days, and how many machines have a specific version of the software.

    What is most valuable?

    ManageEngine Desktop Central automatically alerts you if there are newer releases or updates. You do not have to go to their website and check.

    Your agents or your assets that are managed by ManageEngine Desktop Central, if you have a relay server, the agents will work over the internet. If there is an asset, then there is some vulnerability. As long as it's powered on and connected to the internet, it doesn't need to be on the corporate-wide area network. As long as it's on the internet, you can go ahead and manage it.

    What needs improvement?

    ManageEngine Desktop Central should keep up with some of the features that other major vendors are providing, such as Microsoft. 

    If this solution could include the MDM component, then it would be a very strong contender with the other competitors.

    The OS deployment of the solution could improve, I tested it before, and it was weak.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using ManageEngine Desktop Central for approximately four years.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability of ManageEngine Desktop Central could improve. We have found that at times it can become a bit unstable. We have had issues with that in the past, but not much lately. 

    The performance of the solution is good.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    The solution is easy to scale. What you need for your scalability is to have more assets. You can scale the resources, such as the processor and memory. The way to scale would be doing the repositories at sites.

    We have approximately five IT users using this solution in the organization.

    We have been using ManageEngine Desktop Central extensively in my organization but in the last year or so more we have been focused more on the SCCM. We plan to increase usage as the company expands.

    How are customer service and support?

    I've spoken with technical support in the past. It's a hit and miss, depending on who you speak with support. Some agents are very strong and some agents tell us to read an article and come back if we have any more problems.

    The technical support could improve by being more consistent.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    I have used other solutions in the past.

    How was the initial setup?

    We do our software deployment based on a logical grouping of computers. ManageEngine Desktop Central provides the ability to create groups or a collection of computers. That's what they call it. If we can create the collection, of the software we've just uploaded to ManageEngine Desktop Central, it synchronizes it against all repositories. Then based on that collection, we only need to tell it to deploy that piece of software to the computers.

    We can also use another tool for deployment that Desktop Central has which is really nice called the self-service portal. We have a list of applications that are common and ones that are not. The applications that not every user uses. For example, in the SAP GUI, not everybody uses SAP. We can have it published in the self-service portal and if the user needs it, they can deploy it themselves.

    What about the implementation team?

    We use one person for the deployment of the solution. However, the deployment difficulty and time depends on a few factors, such as the size of the collection, how many computers are you deploying it to, how many users, and what is the size of the package and their complexities. Usually, once it's all replicated and the agents are online, if we tell it to deploy, it's almost immediate. Additionally, we do deployment based on off-hours, we can do them immediately or we can schedule deployments.

    When the solution is up and running it does not require a lot of maintenance because it uses PostgreSQL, they have routines that manage the database. The only thing that you need to keep your eye on is the size of the repositories because as you patch more and you deploy more software, the size of your repositories grows and you need to keep a watch on this.

    What was our ROI?

    We make everybody else look good. We have received a return on investment because we were able to deploy applications a lot easier where we do not have to get the field services team involved.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is very affordable.

    The nice thing about ManageEngine Desktop Central is that when it's time for renewal, you can increase your footprint by the number of assets you're managing. I can scale up and down based on the size of my organization.

    What other advice do I have?

    My advice to those wanting to implement this solution would be if they have a small IT department and they do not have strong IT people, ManageEngine Desktop Central is pretty simple to deploy. The complexity is not as big as an SCCM or some of the other products.

    In terms of training, there's a lot of things on YouTube that tell you exactly how to do it. There is some good documentation from ManageEngine Desktop Central. It is very simple to deploy and get it up and running.

    I rate ManageEngine Desktop Central an eight out of ten.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    reviewer1394538 - PeerSpot reviewer
    Product Manager - Solution Architect at iOCO
    Real User
    Top 10Leaderboard
    Enables you to do desktop support without interrupting the user
    Pros and Cons
    • "The ability to run event viewer, task manager, services, command, file browser, certificate all remotely without interrupting users is the most valuable aspect. Software deployment and prohibiting, allowing us to standardize on the software that has been deployed through the environment and then prohibiting illegal software such as torrent applications has been valuable."
    • "I would like to see more click to complete actions such as - USB lockdown for Mac, the ability to check AV compliance on servers, bit locker controls, printer tracking or print page tracking, self-help for self-healing like "BMC my IT" and more options in the self-service menu other than just software - maybe add integration in ADSelfService at the self-service menu."

    What is our primary use case?

    We have been using ManageEngine Desktopcentral UEM edition in our organization for a year now. We have 1,2000 employees on 80 domains in more than 20 countries around Africa and the world. Its always been an issue to effectively manage such a complex environment. We have changed toolsets every 3 years due to shortcomings in the products. Maintaining patching compliance or standardizing security policies are almost impossible without an application to assist. 

    Things like enforcing a baseline security compliance become more important every year and now with WFH, the system needs to easily cater for it. To add to the problems of managing a large environment we have to look after mobile devices too. With desktop central, we have been able to maintain patch compliance across our entire estate. Manage software licensing and deployment. Enforce minimum security compliance. Work towards a zero-touch environment with automated deployment and custom scripting. We have used the image capture and deployability to do remote deployment of OS in remote areas where previously we would have to send out a person. 

    DesktopCentral allows you to do desktop support without interrupting the user, by using remote event viewer or remote CMD a desktop technician can do troubleshooting without the user knowing. This allows for a more professional and modern way of doing IT support. Integrating into ManageEngine, ServiceDesk Plus has created even further efficiencies by allowing the user to use the agent's self-service portal to request software, create a workflow to have approvals in place, and let desktop central automatically deploy the software once it's approved. 

    DesktopCentral also pulls all the CI information from a users machine and keeps a history of things like Software, Hardware, warranty and shipping date. This information gets passed to the ServiceDesk to populate the asset management portion of the desk. Keeping everything “OS Management” in one portal makes life for the engineer easier, the engineer doesn’t need to jump between multiple systems to achieve basic tasks. We also have a vast verity of OSs from windows 7,8,10, Server to CentOS, Ubuntu, and macOS which we are required to manage. DesktopCentral allows for our engineers to offer the same level of support across all platforms, all domains, all networks all the time.

    How has it helped my organization?

    Basic tasks like setting up USB locks on specific departments can be done in as little as three minutes. We have used DesktopCentral to run scripts that enable BitLocker across certain departments and it passes the encryption key back to the security tab within the DesktopCentral portal, this really saves a lot of time and extra expense on third-party tools. We have also locked down all systems for specific applications like BitTorrent and disabled automatic updates also in under three minutes. Maintaining Patch Compliance too.

    What is most valuable?

    The ability to run event viewer, task manager, services, command, file browser, certificate all remotely without interrupting users is the most valuable aspect. Software deployment and prohibiting, allowing us to standardize on the software that has been deployed through the environment and then prohibiting illegal software such as torrent applications has been valuable. We have also used the in-depth data gathered from each machine to enhance our Asset management and CMDB and created an array of scheduled reports to keep BU managers unto date on their IT.

    What needs improvement?

    I would like to see more click to complete actions such as - USB lockdown for Mac, the ability to check AV compliance on servers, bit locker controls, printer tracking or print page tracking, self-help for self-healing like "BMC my IT" and more options in the self-service menu other than just software - maybe add integration in ADSelfService at the self-service menu. 

    I would also like self enrolment page for agent-based deployment like that for the MDM or modern management options. A physical location for agent-based machines like on modern management.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I have been using ManageEngine for one year.

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    In the year we have run it, its never gone down.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    It performs well, the report module is the slowest of the system but its acceptable.

    How are customer service and technical support?

    The support team needs work, I have waited months for an answer to some of our requests.

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Yes, the solution didn't offer enough options for the complexity of our environment.

    How was the initial setup?

    The initial setup is straightforward - it's all self-explanatory.

    What about the implementation team?

    In-house using white papers and previous tooling experience.

    What was our ROI?

    We have been able to reduce the amount of people needed to support the environment because of automation ability.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    Setup costs are very little, pricing is reasonable and licensing can get complicated but it isn't rocket science.

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    Yes, Kasaya and SolarWinds.

    What other advice do I have?

    I recommend trying it for 30 days, you will be surprised.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: We also resell the software if our customers request it
    Manager - IT at a consultancy with 1,001-5,000 employees
    Real User
    Very user friendly and patch management is effortless
    Pros and Cons
    • "The solution is time-saving and resource-saving."
    • "The solution lacks some configuration."

    What is our primary use case?

    We carried out a POC on Desktop Central before implementing and it's been in production for two months. Our use case is for patching third-party applications and Windows applications. We use the solution extensively so that aside from the monthly scanning we use it to work on Microsoft vulnerabilities.

    We are customers of Desktop Central and I'm an IT Manager. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    Previously, our monthly maintenance would have taken about eight hours, and two or three people continuously on a laptop. Our maintenance is now carried out by this solution and once it's done there just needs to be a check for errors. It's time-saving and resource-saving which is pretty good. 

    What is most valuable?

    The patch management is really wonderful, it's effortless and just a matter of building a few configurations and creating a few templates which can be reused. The UI is quite good and user-friendly. 

    What needs improvement?

    There are a few basic things that haven't been configured in the tool. We're dealing with 600, 700 servers. The way the solution has been configured means you can only see 500 systems at a time. The company has acknowledged that this is an issue but they haven't worked on it yet. It's a little strange given the amount of time the product has been on the market. 

    We're working on migrating to Azure. It involves a new patch that was not picked up by Desktop Central. I think it's a problem for them because Azure is everywhere right now and they don't seem to be up to date with the new patches. More needs to be included because everything Microsoft is launching now is more related to Azure.

    For how long have I used the solution?

    I've been using this solution for six months. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    Performance is good and stable. If it's working on 600 servers at a time, there is a 90-minute window that it uses to communicate with its agent, and that's divided between all the servers. It can hamper performance at times when compared to other tools where you just click and everything is communicated without any wait time. The IT Ops team uses Desktop Central which, in our company, is two or three people. 

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    We haven't yet scaled but I believe it will be quite easy. 

    How was the initial setup?

    All the ManageEngine products are pretty straightforward when it comes to implementation. There are a few configurations you have to do on a network level for the codes, but it's not complicated. I carried out the deployment with one other person. We contacted the vendor a few times for some assistance but that was it. The POC took about a month and the actual deployment took a week to 10 days including configuring everything on the network level.

    In terms of maintenance, the server and installed agent need to be updated on all servers. You do have to check it on your test environment to make sure everything is compatible with a virtual environment, otherwise it could crash your VM. 

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    The solution is relatively cheap because we purchased the full package. For now, we're only using patch management, but it offers many other things such as software deployment, the ability to create configuration packages and install new software. There are no additional costs to the licensing fee. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    We only recently started using Desktop Central, so we're comparing the results with another solution use, BatchPatch. The Desktop Central UI is very good and easy to use. BatchPatch is a cheaper product so it's more complicated and the UI is not as good. What BatchPatch does have that's lacking in Desktop Central is the granular representation of progress and what's happening on the backend. BatchPatch gives you a clear picture of what's happening step by step and progress per server; it gives you specific errors so you can check and troubleshoot. Desktop Central lacks that visibility. If you're carrying out maintenance of 600 servers, you need to have that visibility, so that if something's not right, you can look into it instead of having to wait eight hours.

    What other advice do I have?

    If you're new to the solution, check your requirements because the solution is not suitable for every situation. We're using it for a data center, so we configured it differently. If, for example, you're dealing with local laptops on office premises and you're looking to do patch management, a product like Ivanti might be more useful. For us, Desktop Central is pretty good because we are working on servers, and the vulnerability checks we do on the security base are pretty high, so the patch management option of Desktop Central is pretty good. 

    There is room for improvement, so I rate the solution eight out of 10. 

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
    Flag as inappropriate
    PeerSpot user
    Systems Administrator at a manufacturing company with 501-1,000 employees
    Real User
    Top 5Leaderboard
    Monitors and keeps track of issues that our end users report to our Help Desk Department
    Pros and Cons
    • "ManageEngine Desktop Central has greatly improved our organization by utilizing Service Desk Plus to monitor and keep track of issues that our end users report to our Help Desk Department. We also have written in the ode of our company's software to notify Support if an end-user experience an issue and does not report it."
    • "Not many things are needed for improvement, everything seems to be great as it is. One thing that would be good to have would be the ability to add MDM to a tablet running Android 5.0 using the EMM Token Enrollment. If we wanted to add MDM to an older tablet, we just have to go the "long route" to get it added."

    What is our primary use case?

    Our primary use for Manage Engine started off with just using Service Desk Plus to manage our internal issues.  Since started with just Service Desk Plus, we have moved on to utilizing Asset Management, MDM, and my favorite, the OS Deployment.  Another great part of Desktop Central is the Patch Management to deploy software and windows updates on our time and not Microsoft Windows. We have also utilized the Patch Management to deploy updates to external software such as Zoom, Snagit, Microsoft Teams, and many others. 

    How has it helped my organization?

    ManageEngine Desktop Central has greatly improved our organization by utilizing Service Desk Plus to monitor and keep track of issues that our end users report to our Help Desk Department. We also have written in the ode of our company's software to notify Support if an end-user experience an issue and does not report it. That way we can improve our software and be a more robust organization. Also using the Asset Management gives us a way to see what equipment users have and when they need to be upgraded and or replaced. 

    What is most valuable?

    Although there are many great features within Desktop Central, my most favorite has to be the OS Deployment. When we order new computers in large batches, having the OS Deployment makes the process much, much easier to get them prepared for our users. We also utilize the Self Service Portal to push out applications and give the end-users the option to install the application if they want it and it can be installed without Administrative privileges which takes less time from the Help Desk or System Administrators.  

    What needs improvement?

    Not many things are needed for improvement, everything seems to be great as it is. One thing that would be good to have would be the ability to add MDM to a tablet running Android 5.0 using the EMM Token Enrollment.  If we wanted to add MDM to an older tablet, we just have to go the "long route" to get it added. I would guess another option would be a lower price cap for using all the separate divisions of programs that are being built withing Desktop Central.  We actually opted out of renewing Analytics Plus this last go around because of the cost and the lack of times we actually used it to run reports. 

    For how long have I used the solution?

    We have been utilizing Manage Engine Desktop Central for approximately 2-3 years. 

    What do I think about the stability of the solution?

    The stability and performance of Desktop Central have been great. We have no issues, but we also use the on-prem option.

    What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

    Desktop Central is deferentially very scalable.  They are always coming up with new options very often.  

    How are customer service and technical support?

    Every time we have had to contact the customer support to assist with an issue or an answer, they have always been very knowledgeable and very helpful. They continue to follow-up after the issue has been resolved to ensure everything is going well and if there was anything else they would be able to assist with.   

    Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

    Before we moved over to Desktop Plus, we were using Spice Works, mainly because they were free. They had several applications that are similar to Desktop Central, but they were just not the same.  It was a great investigation to make the switch to Desktop Central. 

    How was the initial setup?

    The setup was fairly simple. We had no issues and were able to get everything up and running within 48 hours.  

    What about the implementation team?

    Not with a vendor team, but with our talented staff of System Administrators who were able to read and study the verbiage of the documentation. 

    What was our ROI?

    It's hard to say what our ROI is because I do not work in the finance department. I can say that the happier we can make the executives and salespeople happy with their equipment their operation, they are able to produce more income for the company.

    What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

    I would advise others to think about using Desktop Desktop for all their network, tickets, and assets needs. I personally have not used the network monitoring software, but it's like any of the other portions of Desktop Central, it must be good. 

    Which other solutions did I evaluate?

    No, there were no other applications we tried.

    What other advice do I have?

    Some times, when adding new programs to Desktop Central, it can be somewhat costly. I say be prepared to be able to spend some money. We asked to pay for several years at a time to lower the long term cost.

    Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

    On-premises
    Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.