ManageEngine Endpoint Central Reviews

Our primary use case is to manage most aspects of the endpoints in 21 remote sites. All sites are connected via IPSec VPN mesh and have distribution servers at each site, OS deployment, software deployment, patch management, remote administration, configurations, mobile device management, and browser management. One of my favorite features is a simple remote CMD. This enables us to troubleshoot certain things without interfering with the user desktop session or needing to ask them to take remote control of the machine. It's very valuable being able to fix a problem without stopping user productivity.

It has become a single pane of glass for a majority of client support and administration. It has enabled my team to quickly identify machines, who is using it, what applications are installed, and a huge set of tools to solve most problems. OS imaging and deployment has significantly reduced the amount of time and resources needed to deploy a large set of new computers or even just reimage a problematic PC because of malware or other problem that would take much longer to troubleshoot. Software deployment has taken the task of installing a common application on hundreds of computers to just a few clicks.

Honestly, I have to say all features together have become the Swiss army knife of desktop management. They all work hand in hand. Software deployment saves an unbelievable amount of time installing an application on hundreds of computers. A full suite of remote administration tools to troubleshoot problems or make a change via PowerShell without intruding on the user desktop. Mobile device management eliminated the problem of missing iPads or iCloud locked tablets and phones. The mundane process of patch management is now a breeze.

I really feel like asset explorer should be a component of desktop central. That would make it the ultimate desktop management tool. This would also simplify the asset management role since an agent is already being deployed and assets could be added at the same time.  the CMDB would be quickly populated with a PC hardware and software inventory along with user relationships. Device assignment and tracking would be another added value. Adding that feature set would tie everything together and be the one-stop-shop of desktop management suites.

Approximately a year.

It's very stable it just seems to always work.

Very scalable. Distribution servers are the main factor.

The few times we have contacted customer support they have always very quickly solved the problem. Every support agent has been very professional and curteous. 

We did not use a different solution. We did a trial Desktop central and immediately fell in love with it and have not regretted the decision.

It was very easy to setup initially. The side effect is you will spend a lot of time tweaking and fine-tuning everything. 

In-house.

Time saved is money saved.

Go with what you can afford. Every part of the application is going to save time and money and a very worthwhile investment.

We did not evaluate competing products. Everything we were looking for was there and worked well and was easy to use.

We have about 180 endpoints that are spread across several buildings. We have an Active Directory environment. It is hard to maintain updates, install software, and do support in such an environment. Desktop Central has given tools to maintain our environment with ease, deploy updates to machines. Deploy software is an easy to use tool for our needs. The tool for remote support is so great with the ability to use shortcuts and chat. Also, we use an asset scan option very much to maintain an overview of our environment.

Since deploying Desktop Central our endpoints are all updated. We use configuration management to deploy shortcuts to our users' desktops with ease. Also, we use configuration management to map logical hard drives to our users. Our users are very happy with how much ease IT can solve their problems. Also, we have an overview of our complete IT environment and assets so we can upgrade our endpoints as needed. And we are an overall much secure IT environment since we deployed Desktop Central because all our endpoints are up to date.

Patch management is an excellent tool because we deploy patches with ease and also decline patches. Asset management and scan are also very useful because we have an overview of all our endpoints and their configurations. Remote connections to endpoints for support is great with chat, shortcuts to tools, and user keyboard locking. Also, notifications, if someone tries to remove any hardware from the endpoint, is working very well. We have somewhat used reporting options but it works very well and we will surely use it in the future.

We would like to see options for deploying Microsoft 365 accounts into Outlook. For now, we only can use it to deploy exchange accounts. Also, we would like to see an option do decline Windows 7 ESU patches in a bulk. For now, we have to decline them one by one which is not an easy process. Also, we are not clear about uninstalling Desktop Central patches from our server. That is not a problem for now but in the future, it could be. There should be some more clearance on how to uninstall Desktop Central patches and what are the consequences.

We have been using it for six months.

Great stability.

There are a lot of scenarios for scalability but we have not tried it yet. ManageEngine has a lot of products that can be integrated with DesktopCentral, like Service Desk Plus and Browser Security plus but we have not tried it yet.

Had no need for customer service or technical support.

We did not use a different solution.

It is very easy to setup and tutorials and online support are great.

We deployed it in-house.

The licensing is very easy to understand and pricing is right for what you get.

We didn't.

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.

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.

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.

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.

I have been using ManageEngine for one year.

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

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

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

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

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

In-house using white papers and previous tooling experience.

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

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

Yes, Kasaya and SolarWinds.

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

Desktop Central has been used to solve the following problems within the organization I have implemented it into:

1. Ensures that the inventory of hardware and software is accurate.

2. Ensures that the configuration of this hardware and software is in alignment with organizational policies and procedures.

3. Ensures the vulnerabilities of hardware and software is understood.

4. Ensures that the remediation of these vulnerabilities is planned and accomplished.

5. Sustainably build secure devices rapidly.

6. Create policies and procedures that are easily repeatable because of the use of a powerful all-inclusive tool.

Desktop Central has improved these organizations and this is why it has been repeated multiple times at multiple organizations. If something works and is getting better it is worth repeating.

Because of Desktop Central, these organizations now have an accurate inventory of software in their organizations and can control what software can be on their devices and cannot. They have an authoritative and living inventory of devices and know who is using them. These devices and this software can be reliably configured in alignment with standards. Vulnerabilities are identified and remediated rapidly and devices are able to be rapidly imaged.

This platform is powerful because of the following:

1. It combines many powerful functionalities into one user-friendly and intuitive interface. 

2. The scope of the platform makes the platform worth spending the time to train users on.

3. The platform is easy to train others on and because of these efforts with the platform can be replicated making the team more agile and effective.

4. Granular access can be provisioned so users can have access to the tools and systems that are needed for a user and not everything they do not need.

Computer imaging is powerful but breaks frequently. The reason for this breaking is not clear and requires heavy amounts of attention to keep operational. There is a lot of room for this tool to do more but the reliability of this process should be focused on first to ensure core competencies are being fixed before more features are added. 

Support, when a problem happens, is not efficient at responding to problems and resolving issues efficiently. This is difficult because the time when we need this to be at its best is when we are having a problem and this has compromised our confidence in the product because support might not be confident in resolving issues when they come up.  

I have implemented and operationalized Desktop Central at two organizations that I have had lead technology strategy for over the past 5 years.

Several parts of the solution are very stable and other parts require additional focus on stability.

Desktop Central becomes more and more dependant upon the initial architecture of the platform the more and organization needs to scale up and out. There appears to be no onboarding process that accounts for accommodating users that want to ensure the initial architecture is invested in properly.

Our customer service and technical support experience has been lackluster and were are keen on seeing this improve.

Other tools were used and we switched because the other solutions were weak in some areas and support was unable to help when bugs were found, services were unreliable or when services stopped working for no reason. 

The initial setup for someone new to the platform is complex. This is especially true for more refined setup areas. 

In-house development. Difficult time finding vendor teams that are trusted and can bring expertise and efficiency. I would be interested in even using a resource like this today to help continue in adoption. 

Setup requires you to really roll up your sleeves and to dig in to connect the dots to get things up and running. Resources are not easy to find that are experts in deploying this platform and getting it fully up and running. The more you can refine the deployment the more value that the platform provides and someone that has never deployed this platform will see a high barrier of entry to accomplish these finer elements.

Other options were evaluated and as the market evolves they continue to be evaluated.

My primary use case of this solution is to monitor software installs. 

ManageEngine has improved my organization because right now we can actually monitor and find out which software products are installed on each desktop. We can then figure out which ones have to get patched and so forth.

We haven't used all the features. The parts that we're using are pretty good. I would like to see them include the ability to find out the network usage but I believe that might be a feature of it already.

It's fairly stable. Since I've been here working with the company we haven't had any issues with it. 

Scalability is very good. We've got about 100 desktops we're managing at the moment. We require two people for maintenance.

We haven't had to contact their technical support. So far this solution is working well and doing what it's supposed to do.

It's a very good product and I would suggest it to someone considering it. It's been working very well. Since it's been running I don't think we've ever had any issues with it. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

What is valuable for us is the ability to manage Windows OS, Mac OS, and Linux OS on a single console. This also includes push applications, patches, and configurations on all three platforms.

We are able to manage all user operating systems on a single console.

Management of Mac OS X, Linux OS, and encryption. We would like this to be on par with how Windows OS is managed.

Also, the reporting feature could be more flexible.

We have been using the solution for three years.

We had an issue with the reporting feature, but other than this, it's pretty robust.

We did not encounter any issues with scalability.

The technical support is excellent.

We previously used SCCM and ARD. Cost was a big factor. Just the ability to manage all operating systems on a single console was the main reason we chose this solution. Ease of use for the administration was also a big factor.

The setup was straightforward.

We evaluated Jamf, Lansweeper, TriActive, FileWave, etc.

Look for something that will fit your environment, budget, and level of expertise. For us, we manage all OSs. This was a perfect fit.

We also have 5000 endpoints. ManageEngine allows us to manage these endpoints at a fraction of the cost.

Our IT administrators are also able to use the product without much complication compared to other competitors.

Desktop Management and various reporting features.

We have almost 2500 computers inside our private network. Managing those computers from a single console meant a dream come true for us.

Besides this, central patch management and detailed reporting, especially active directory or inventory management reporting, boosts up our regular activities.

Reporting should be customizable. Although there is already a scope of customized reporting, there should be some other option. Besides for that, for inventory management, this software takes data from active directory’s database.

Sometimes this shows some garbage or duplicate value. There should be some method to search the out of order or dead computers.

Since December 2016.

Not yet.

Not really.

Technical support is not up to the mark. In my opinion, this is the area where they should look after more carefully.

I used some trial versions of Microsoft SCCM and different ManageEngine products including ADaudit Plus , ADmanager Plus.

The initial setup was very easy and straightforward

There is a strange licensing policy regarding technician restrictions. Normally, it comes with single technician license (at least at our scenario), which means only one admin user can log into the system.

I think the licensing details, as well as the local partner’s technical resources, need to be evaluated before purchasing the product.

Yes we do, Microsoft SCCM.

Secure USB has allowed us to secure USB ports on our PCs, thus improving our PSN compliance. The main selling point is that it's centralized. We can easily control which system should have access to what and we’re also able to produce a report in case of a security issue.

Patch Management provides us with the ability to patch third-party software on terminal servers. This has improved productivity in terms of being able to automate the process as well as targeting the rights OUs, Security Groups, etc. I have successfully decommissioned my WSUS server and now all Microsoft updates are performed using the “Automate Patch Deployment”.

“Deployment Policy”: It provides me with the ability to schedule server/non-server reboots. This has, for the time being, been the solution for a Microsoft bug for server 2012 R2 whereby a server does not properly reboot after MS updates been applied and forcefully does it when the user logs on instead.

I no longer have to use a dedicated WSUS server, everything is properly scheduled including the ability to get reports via e-mail. Everything is administered using a web interface. It’s an all-in-one solution not just for patches but for software inventories as well. From a sys admin point of view, it now requires less effort and time to perform these administrative tasks.

I would like the deployment window time to be reduced as it currently requires a minimum of three hours. The automated patch deployment should stick to its own schedule.

The web interface is sometimes confusing and requires improvement, meaning it should be easy to find your way round if you’re looking for a specific option, i.e. adding a new computer object.

Some help files aren’t helpful as they don’t clearly explain the tasks to follow. There should be videos or more scenarios to assist the user.

I've used it for less than a year.

At first it took me some time to understand how to automate the patches, especially the “deployment window time”, other than that everything becomes straightforward once you've spent “some time” learning the process.

None

No

4/10. Symantec, for instance, has better business support as you can log in for follow ups. It takes time for your call to be answered; you don’t know what your SLA is; you don’t get a quick reply. It’s basically not there yet.

For Windows updates we used WSUS. With MangeEngine it’s so much easier to administer and monitor. We struggled to update 3rd party applications in the past. Software deployment is also not an issue anymore and easily manageable.

I wasn't involved in it.

In-house. My recommendation would be to export all your computer objects, in .csv format for instance, from AD then import into ManageEngine. It would be simple and shorten the amount of time it would’ve taken, otherwise, to manually add each object and subsequently ease the process of deploying the agents to each object.

With Secure USB, the system relies on the Device Instance ID of the USB device to identify and secure it (Allow, Deny). For implementation, my advice would be to “Deny all USB access” in order to allow access to devices only permitted by the organisation when plugged in.

The “Device Instance ID” is a unique, long string, alphanumerical identifier. To allow access to a specific device you’ll need to copy/paste this ID (from Device Manager) into ManageEngine. Let’s say you now have 20 IDs listed, how would you know which ID is for which device, as ManageEngine does not provide such option. I ended up creating a spreadsheet which records such information. That’s quite a convoluted way of doing things.

A USB Device can have multiple “Device Instance Id”: i.e. Digital camera. That means sometimes it becomes a hit and miss to get the device to work.

The automation control over scheduling server patching along with the ability to automate the reboot time has been critical. This process isn't straightforward, but after figuring out the requirements staggering reboots is an easy process to manage.

The software has provided the ability for us to not only replace SCCM seamlessly, but to train and allow for easy cross training.

The way patches are pushed out and applied can use a little work as it appears the patches are pushed out and just force applied as a group, as opposed to a specific registry pattern. Not too often, but this causes servers lockup or fail patching as it halts reboots before other patches can be applied which cannot be applied because the registry is locked from previous patches applied.

This software has been in place coming up on a year now. The flexibility of the software has proven very useful. A small business perspective replacing SCCM with this product has proven both cost effective and an efficient use of our staffs time.

We have had no issues deploying it.

There have been no stability issues.

Overall once we figured out the process structure we really did not have a whole lot of issues. From our client base, and architecture I do not see anything that would hinder scalability based on the way the remote offices are setup within this code.

I would preface this by saying in general the FAQ's are pretty helpful. Overall the support system has been helpful for this specific product, but we have not needed a whole lot of assistance.

We previously used SCCM which is a great enterprise solution if you can keep the administration knowledge on-site. For a small business, SCCM did not meet the ease of use or the price break which was the reasoning for the move to Desktop Manager MSP 9.

The installation of the product itself was very straightforward. The installer was pretty much default settings all the way through and was able to reference FAQ's for the few custom settings we desired.

Implementation was done in-house and for the most part was straightforward. Once the client setup process is done I would suggest babysitting the automated pushes for a couple of weeks. We ran into some weird issues that we were able to resolve fairly quickly and completed the maintenance during our timeframe which otherwise would have just looked like the patching jobs failed completely when they succeeded in reality.

The ROI switching to this product was noticeable after it had been around six months as we were able to retire our SCCM product along with the licensing that comes with using SQL.

I like the ease of setup and administration. There are some minor annoyances with how often the server software needs patched, how patching is applied and how the terminologies are translated.

Keep an eye on the automated reporting that is generated. We have not fully invested the time to discover why we have inconsistencies with the data, but it appears to be happening.

The features that give us the most value are patch management, remote control, and configuration management.

We used to use Windows Server Update Services, but had difficulty getting reports that gave an accurate picture of the patch situation across the estate. 

Desktop Central allows both Microsoft and third-party patching while giving precise reporting and dashboards, enabling us to catch problem computers easily, as well as show the company that we are keeping their IT infrastructure safe.

The ability to backup and restore or move user profiles to another PC would be a fantastic addition to the feature set.

We have used this solution for five years now.

We've had no issues with deployment.

We've had no issues with stability.

We've had no issues with scalability.

I have found customer service to be very responsive. I have had a couple of issues over the years and on one occasion logged a ticket on the ManageEngine support site and had a call back within 15 minutes. The support rep took control of the server and fixed the issue within 10 minutes. 

They are also very responsive as far as feature requests are concerned. I have in the past requested features and have had at least some of them make it into the product.

We used Altiris for our service desk, as well as systems management, before it became Symantec. It was a very good but expensive solution. 

I was tasked with finding a replacement for the cost of the maintenance of Altiris. I did that with the combination of ServiceDesk Plus, Desktop Central and OS Deployer.

Installation and initial configuration is very easy, taking less than an hour to have a fully-working system on a network of 700+ computers. Obviously, it takes more time to fine tune the solution to your exact needs, but you can have an installation ready and auditing your estate in no time at all. I would say that any reasonably competent IT person can set this up with no outside help. The installation was very easy and required no help from any outside company including ManageEngine.

I did it by myself in-house.

Not sure if it is the case now, but they used to say 80% of the features of the big players for 20% of the cost. I think that they may be overlooked because of the price, but download it and take a look. You will be very surprised.

Give it a go. If you are a small business of less than 25 users, it is free. For larger companies, it is a very reasonably priced solution. It is feature rich and the list of features is growing rapidly. Depending on the version you have, new features are free of charge. Some features are only in Enterprise and not in Pro.