ManageEngine Endpoint Central Reviews

We use this solution for Patch Management, IT Asset Management, and Remote Control on Network Computers.

We adopted this solution by replacing GFI LanGuard.

Current version of Endpoint central has great capabilities over patch management and software deployment. Also we can take advantages of many system tools and configurations for day to day work.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the Patch Management.

The Patch Management functionality needs still improvements. No provision to control network traffic. 

The Deployment scheduler needs updating to support various methods for deployment.

We have used this solution from 2012 onward.

Solution is very stable and has great featurs that can be used by system admins.

The product has great capabilitied only the should understand the patching process more deeply to avoid failures and client system issues such as OS corrupt, continuos patch failed, system hanging etc.

Support needs improvement. They totally realy on customers at present.

GFI LanGuard has poor capicity and feature for patch deployment. We find many client computer OS getting corrupt due to improper patch deployment.

It take a while to understand the process for us.

We implemented in-house.

Manage Engine Licensing policy is best among all. You should always take 10% less licenses than projected. I will advise to learn and implement the solution in-house rather than buying initial setup service.

GFI LanGuard

You can limit the admins and users for the Endpoint Management to reduce the cost.

I like that we can manage everything totally in one dashboard. We can install software easily. Anyone can handle the installation. It's got good documentation. 

The setup is pretty simple. 

It's scalable. 

The technical communication needs to be better. They need better technical support.

The solution is expensive. 

I've been using the solution for one to two months. 

The product is stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. I'd rate the stability eight or nine out of ten based on its reliability.

It is scalable. It is simple to expand. I'd rate its ability to scale eight out of ten. 

Technical support has not been great. I haven't been pleased with their ability to assist when we need help. That said, there are some technicians that are good if you can get a hold of them.

Negative

It is easy to set up the solution. I'd rate the ease of implementation nine out of ten. It is not overly complex. 

It is a pretty expensive solution. With one being cheap and ten being expensive, I'd rate the affordability at a nine out of ten. Compared to other products, it costs a lot. 

I'm a customer and end user. 

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. I'm pretty happy with its capabilities. 

The solution is implemented in a medium-sized company. We're working with the enterprise edition.

The solution is deployed on-premises and on the cloud.

The patch manager is good and it's easy to use. There's a good learning curve. It's easy to deploy and can be implemented in a short amount of time.

The MDM feature isn't very good. It doesn't support Amazon vendors.

I have used this solution for seven years.

It's stable.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support is very good.

Compared with VMware Workspace, ManageEngine Desktop Central is a better product.

It's easy to set up.

I would rate this solution as 10 out of 10. 

It's stable and there are no bugs. It's a very good solution. 

Windows patching and inventory management are the most valuable features

ManageEngine Desktop Central is very limited. When you scan your system, it will only recognize Microsoft Windows Defender and BitLocker. The warranty period, on Desktop Central only recognizes the Dell. They do not recognize HP and they do not recognize any other brand like ThinkPad.

I have been using ManageEngineDesktop Central for eleven years.

ManageEngine Desktop Central is stable.

We maintain ourselves, but if there is something beyond our knowledge, then we contact technical support.

Neutral

I have used Spiceworks.

I would rate pricing as a seven on a scale of one to ten. ManageEngine Desktop Central could be cheaper.

Seven hundred users are currently using the system.

I would rate ManageEngine Desktop Central an eight on a scale of one to ten.

We don't yet use it in our office. It is for our customers. We have implemented it for a few banking customers in the middle east, and we are now waiting to also use it for our internal purposes.

In terms of technical capability, it is doing very well. It is doing better than other industry products. It is at a place where we can compare it with Microsoft products. Its scalability is also good.

Its licensing should be improved.

I have been using it for almost two years.

It is stable.

It is scalable by nature. It supports two models: on-premises and SaaS.

I would advise any organization that wants to implement Manage Engine to pick the right components of Manage Engine during the design stage itself, such as Patch Manager or Mobile Desk Manager, and then go ahead with the implementation. 

I would rate it a seven out of 10.

We are in the testing phase of ManageEngine Desktop Central. 

ManageEngine Desktop Central's most valuable features are remote desktop control and image management. We can send things out from the desk here, it is a very good tool for us.

The reporting analytics could improve in ManageEngine Desktop Central. However, there are some third-party add-ins or modules you can purchase to do reporting analytics.

I have used ManageEngine Desktop Central within the last 12 months.

We have had sales support from ManageEngine Desktop Central and they have been very helpful.

The initial setup is straightforward. My manager is in the process and there have not been any problems.

ManageEngine Desktop Central should not require a lot of maintenance that we have seen in the short time of our usage.

I rate ManageEngine Desktop Central a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to manage all aspects of our use of Windows.

The centralized control of all of our Windows hardware that this solution offers has been most valuable to our organization.

Compared to the solution we use to manage our Mac products, this solution lacks the ability to create dynamic groups. We would like the ability, for example, for machines that have been upgraded to form part of a grouping based on this upgrade. 

Another feature we would like is a distribution server to allow communication between our company's different servers using the internet. I have already suggested this functionality and it is being worked on by ManageEngine. 

We have used this solution for more than one year. 

This is a stable solution. When there are bugs, they are fixed with new updates which are easy to install. 

This is a scalable solution. We have more than 5000 users.

The customer support team is great. I have not experienced a support team like this using any other solution. There is an online chat channel that is easy to use. 

The initial setup was straightforward. Vendor support is not needed. The solution's support team are helpful and good at providing support. 

I haven't had any issues using this solution and would recommend it to other users if it fits their business requirements. 

I would rate it a nine out of ten. 

My main use case of Desktop Central is for patch management, software deployment, and inventory.

Desktop Central has solved multiple problems for us, including providing patch management so we can get ISO 27001 certification. It also means that we can deploy to all of our machines at once.

The most valuable features of Desktop Central are patch management and deployment.

I would like for the next release to be available as SaaS.

I have been working with this solution for three years.

Desktop Central is stable.

This solution is easy to scale.

My experience with technical support has been good.

The initial setup was generally straightforward and easy, though there can be difficulties if your organization has offices in multiple locations. On average, deployment takes around fifteen to twenty days.

Desktop Central is affordable for any customer.

Desktop Central is a very good, functional solution for endpoint management. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

I'm currently using this solution as a configuration manager, for patch management, and scheduling the batches to run automatically, as well as OS deployment, MDM, for install agents on other computers, to allow us to see the software in the inventory.

Patch management is the most useful aspect of the product.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is very good. 

Technical support could be better. They should increase their hours of availability so that they are easier to reach and it's more convenient for us.

The pricing could be a bit better. 

They must change project management on Service Desk Plus to make it possible to integrate with Microsoft Project on Service Desk Plus and to increase the results on Google maps, on the Mobile Management, so that we can track our mobiles devices. Right now, it's not integrated with Google maps. This is a major issue.

I've been using the solution for four years.

The stability of the solution is very good. the performance is reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. there are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution scales well. If a company needs to expand it, it can.

While you can live chat with technical support, they are only available for maybe seven or eight hours a day. If you have a problem at night they aren't available. 

The initial setup was pretty straightforward. It's not a problem at all in terms of being able to handle the implementation. 

I handled the implementation myself. If did not need the assistance of any integrators or consultants.

It's my understanding that the pricing is pretty high.

We're a partner. 

I am currently working with both cloud and on-premises deployment models. 

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution to run on all the desktops in our company. We have unique requirements, and this was the only solution that really met them.

The easy application deployment allows you to use the solution directly.

The solution works very well. It offers excellent performance.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

We find the solution to be pretty stable.

The product can scale well if you need it to.

The pricing of the solution could be better.

The solution should be better at integrating with other solutions. Right now, it's not the best.

I've been using the solution for 12 months. It's been about a year at this point.

The stability is excellent. We haven't experienced any bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's quite good.

The solution can scale quite well. We haven't had issues. If a company wants to expand, it can do so with relative ease.

We have about 15 individuals using the solution.

Although we don't have current plans to increase usage, we might do so in the future.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten in terms of support. They do offer support in Portuguese, which is helpful, however, it could be a bit better.

We used to use a local solution provided by us, however, it was too expensive to maintain. That is the reason we switched to this product.

We did not find the initial implementation to be complex. It was straightforward and simple. If a company needs to implement it themselves, they shouldn't have any problems doing so.

For our organization, the implementation took about three weeks.

You only need one person to handle maintenance. In my organization, that is me.

We did not use an implementor or reseller to help us with the implementation process. We handled the entire setup in-house ourselves.

I'd rate the cost at a seven out of ten. It's okay. It could be a bit more affordable, however, it's not too expensive.

We pay about $250 a year for our license.

We did not evaluate other solutions before settling on this product. It was the only one we considered and looked at.

We are just a customer and end-user. We don't have a business relationship with the product.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I'm not sure which version number we have.

In general, I would recommend the solution. I'd rate it nine out of ten overall, however, I hope that in the future, they improve their integration capabilities.