Fabio Mello - PeerSpot reviewer
Director of Technology at Unirede
Real User
Top 20
Reduces the effort and time for providing a new installation and maintaining the environment
Pros and Cons
  • "Asset management is most valuable. It is essential for all customers. The other features are also useful, but asset management is most important."
  • "Its dashboard needs improvement. Currently, there is no way to modify the dashboard. There should be more flexibility so that we can create views according to our use case."

What is our primary use case?

We use KACE internally in our company to deliver and manage services for our customers. We access it every day. We are on the support page every day. KACE is open in my browser all the time.

We provide our own KACE services to customers. We are managing more than 85,000 machines by using KACE. In terms of the setup, sometimes, there is a shared environment, and sometimes, there is a dedicated environment. 

Our customers are in retail, power, healthcare, and education. We have more than 20 customers with recurring contracts, and we have had many customers for one-time projects. 

Our customers use KACE for inventory and software delivery and distribution. They use it to apply policies and generate reports. We have some customers who use it for Service Desk. We have done some customizations on Service Desk for ITSM in terms of assets and CMDB to maintain all information related to IT assets.

How has it helped my organization?

It provides IT asset management, compliance, software asset management, mobile device management, and patch management. We don't use mobile device management and patch management internally, but we do provide it to our customers. We have some customers who use MDM and patch management. Having all these in one solution is very important for us because Unirede provides monitoring to customers. By using the KACE solution, we are able to provide endpoint management for our customers. This is a gap that KACE filled for us. It is very important for us. We get more than 30% of the revenue through endpoint management for our customers.

It saves time, which is its most important benefit. When you automate tasks, there is a lot of time-saving. Based on the feedback from our customers, it has saved more than 50% time.

It provides what we need for updating and configuring everything the way we need it to be in our environment. For me, it is very easy. It is not a big deal to update when necessary. 

We use Systems Deployment Appliance (SDA) for Windows and Linux devices in our environment. We have used SDA for internal use, for training, and for our customers. We have a few customers who have SDA in place on-premise. We sometimes also use the product to migrate the environment. For example, we use it for migrating from Windows 7 to Windows 10. At the beginning of the pandemic, some of the customers bought a lot of notebooks to make their employees work from home, and we provided migration services to them. By using SDA, we are able to do implementation in a short period, such as one, two, or three months. It is very good for automating the deployments, but, of course, it can be improved. Improvements are always welcomed.

It has increased IT productivity. With SDA, we can reduce a lot of time to provide a new installation. From hours, it gets reduced to minutes. Some customers have told us that their technicians used to spend the whole shift deploying one machine, whereas, with SDA, they could do it in less than one hour for one machine. They were also able to provide a new installation in 30 minutes.

We use machine profiles. We have profiles for the HR department, technicians, etc. We create smart labels related to this information, and we associate the tasks for software, scripts, installation, updates, etc. When the computer is turned on and has the agents installed on it, we detect the profile, and we install and run everything in a few minutes. This is another way to reduce the effort to keep our environment up to date and do automatic installations.

What is most valuable?

Asset management is most valuable. It is essential for all customers. The other features are also useful, but asset management is most important.

Everything is easy to use. KACE was created to be easy. It is very easy as compared to other solutions such as System Center, but it is important to have knowledge of some of the important concepts. For example, the knowledge of smart labels is critical. If you don't have knowledge of smart labels, you won't get its 100% benefit.

We use the Cloud MDM functionality. Its Windows and Mac enrollment capabilities for allowing IT admins to bypass manual device setup are fine. We provide management as a service to some customers, and they have Windows, Linux, and Mac. We also use it for our internal use in the company.

What needs improvement?

Its dashboard needs improvement. Currently, there is no way to modify the dashboard. There should be more flexibility so that we can create views according to our use case.

They can add some tips in the UI to help with the configuration. It will make the interface more user-friendly.

Its reporting also needs to be improved. Its reports are just textual, but we need a graphical report. We should be able to create dashboard views by using different types of graphics, such as pivot graphics. This functionality is currently missing.

We use the Cloud MDM functionality. Its interface is a little bit different from the SDA interface and the SMA interface. The concept related to the labels is also a little bit different. The SDA interface could be changed a little bit to have the same functionality as MDM. It is easier to create smart labels in MDM than in SDA. 

It can also be improved in terms of the consumption of resources or the size of the virtual machine. Currently, we are using a lot of memory and CPU power, and these can be reduced, but it is not a big deal.

Buyer's Guide
Quest KACE Systems Management
November 2022
Learn what your peers think about Quest KACE Systems Management. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
656,474 professionals have used our research since 2012.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using KACE for more than 10 years. I have so far handled 600 implementations of K1000 and K2000 in Brazil and Latin America. I have delivered training for more than 5,000 hours.

In 2010 or 2011, I was trained at KACE headquarters in the USA, and after that, I was in charge of supporting customers in Brazil. I helped them with project implementations, training, and quick starts. In 2016, I joined Dell, and I was in charge of all services related to KACE in Brazil and Latin America. In our company, we started using KACE four years ago.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable, but your infrastructure should meet the requirements for stability. To have stability, you need to meet all the requirements. You need static file systems. If you are using dynamic file systems on the Hyper-V or VM, you might have some issues with stability. You also need to take care of certain things related to the network.

If you have met all requirements and you have 100% compatibility as per the compatibility matrix, it is very stable. If you miss something, you can get into trouble. 

How are customer service and support?

We have their Premier Support because it is very important to have very fast support. I would rate them a nine out of 10. Sometimes, when you have a new hire or a new technician, they don't understand everything before denying some requests. They need to be more flexible.

How was the initial setup?

It is not complex. It is easy, but you need to have knowledge of various concepts, such as smart labels. It is important. Otherwise, it won't be so easy. To make it easier and more user-friendly, they can provide some tips in the UI during the configuration.

What was our ROI?

Its ease of use has helped in getting an ROI in a very short time. We sell KACE as a service, and we got our ROI within three months.   

What other advice do I have?

I would rate it a nine out of 10. It could be improved a little bit more. 

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor. The reviewer's company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PeerSpot user
Scott Baxter  - PeerSpot reviewer
Technical Support Engineer at City of Rochester
Real User
Top 20
Saves a lot of time, increases productivity, and is easy to use on a daily basis
Pros and Cons
  • "Pretty much all of the features are valuable. The inventory is very helpful to be able to keep track of our devices. The deployments make it easy to deploy new software packages or upgrade packages. The help desk is also a great tool for tracking problems and problem tickets."
  • "There isn't a lot they need to improve with the solution itself at this point. It is pretty close to providing a single pane of glass for everything that we need for endpoint management specifically on all devices. There is very little that it doesn't provide for us, and for those, we have to go to other methods. There are some of the patching solutions that it doesn't take care of for us. So, we have to do those manually on the devices, and that's really the biggest thing. It doesn't do patching really well for non-Microsoft applications. The major application updates, particularly Windows updates, don't function nearly as well, but, for the vast majority of things, it does just fine. If they could improve in this aspect, that'd be great, but I don't know if they're going to be able to do that."

What is our primary use case?

It is a virtual device. We use it for our everyday systems management and software deployment. It is implemented on all of our devices as an inventory and asset management tracking system. Our help desk system is utilized through it, and we do software distribution and deployments from it. We do all of those things on a daily basis.

We just updated to the beta version 12 on our test prep unit. We're on 11.1 on our active production device.

How has it helped my organization?

It has been very helpful in terms of management. The speed at which we're able to address help tickets is invaluable. We are able to maintain a history of problems and reference that information. That's been a huge piece.

Software distribution was what we initially purchased the product for, and it immediately paid for itself in time saved. We were looking to implement a new version of Office at the time, and we were anticipating a 6 to 12 weeks process to do the upgrade on all of our machines. With the device, we were able to complete that process in under a week. We saved a huge amount of time. At the time, I was the only tech who would have been doing the job. So, it would have been six weeks or so of my time. It has saved my hourly wage at the time for six weeks. We now have three people. Our roles are all the same. We're all IT technicians.

It has increased IT productivity. It has improved the speed for addressing end-user needs, distributing and updating software, and dealing with software vulnerabilities through patching. We could do these things much faster through the product.

It provides patch management, IT asset management, software asset management, and compliance. It also provides mobile device management, but we don't use it. The combination of all these things is really important for us. The patch management would be top of the list of those items. Asset management would be second, and software asset management would be third on that list. Compliance would be the last one.

It is really good for updating and configuring everything the way we need it to be in our environment. On a scale of one to ten, it is about an eight or a nine.

Its System Deployment Appliance (SDA) is wonderful for automating deployments. It is very quick and fairly easy to move forward with deployments. It makes deployments much smoother and quicker.

What is most valuable?

Pretty much all of the features are valuable. The inventory is very helpful to be able to keep track of our devices. The deployments make it easy to deploy new software packages or upgrade packages. The help desk is also a great tool for tracking problems and problem tickets.

It is very easy to set up and very easy to use on a daily basis. There is a lot of stuff to learn in terms of how do you do something and the things that it can do. It is just a matter of taking the time to learn all the functionalities and all of the nuances of how to use it, but it is pretty intuitive to use.

What needs improvement?

There isn't a lot they need to improve with the solution itself at this point. It is pretty close to providing a single pane of glass for everything that we need for endpoint management specifically on all devices. There is very little that it doesn't provide for us, and for those, we have to go to other methods. There are some of the patching solutions that it doesn't take care of for us. So, we have to do those manually on the devices, and that's really the biggest thing. It doesn't do patching really well for non-Microsoft applications. The major application updates, particularly Windows updates, don't function nearly as well, but, for the vast majority of things, it does just fine. If they could improve in this aspect, that'd be great, but I don't know if they're going to be able to do that.

The end-user training could also be better. I did talk to them the other day at a seminar about the training availability for end-users.

For how long have I used the solution?

I believe we've been using KACE since 2003.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is very scalable. We've grown, and we've probably doubled our end-point devices since we started using this system. 

In terms of end-users, we've got about 1,200 system users in the city who use the help desk. There are 10 or 12 of us in IT that utilize the inventory, asset management, and software distribution side of things for IT management of those end-devices. It is being used very well, and we don't have any plans to increase its usage.

How are customer service and support?

Their support has been really good. We don't need support very often because the system is so stable. It is usually a matter of not knowing how to do something when we end up getting support, but that has been pretty rare.

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

We did not have anything.

How was the initial setup?

It was really straightforward. It took half a day. Our implementation strategy was to just get it up and running.

What about the implementation team?

We did it with KACE directly.

What was our ROI?

It paid for itself within the first month we had it. So, the return on investment was incredible.

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

Their pricing is per end-point device. There is an initial cost for the license for the server, which is pretty low, and then there is a per end-point device license, which is also fairly low. So, the pricing is still reasonable. 

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We compared it to Microsoft's SCCM. At the time, that was the only one we compared it to. The SCCM product in our mind was really intended for a large complex environment with thousands or tens of thousands of computers and multiple servers. At the time, we were several hundred computers. So, we were looking for something that was really built around that environment and for use of a smaller entity. Quest KACE was built around that, and it just worked out really well for us. It was a whole lot cheaper, as well.

What other advice do I have?

I would advise just looking at the size of the environment in the end in terms of where you're going to end up. You have to make sense of the environment.

I would also advise others to take the time to learn about the system. There is a lot that it can do. We've had it going on 20 years. There is still stuff that we don't really know how to use or don't utilize to the capacity that we could. That's just because we have never taken the time or had the time to learn all of the pieces and parts and how to do different things within it. My recommendation would be to learn as much as you possibly can out of the box. Learn as much as you can and as quickly as you can to be able to utilize it because you'll never regret it.

From what I have seen, it is hands down a 10 out of 10.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Quest KACE Systems Management
November 2022
Learn what your peers think about Quest KACE Systems Management. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: November 2022.
656,474 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Michael (Mikey) Wright - PeerSpot reviewer
Systems Administrator at Custom Truck One Source
Real User
Top 20
Easy to use, saves us time, and increases IT productivity
Pros and Cons
  • "You don't have to be an advanced user. Rather, in terms of ease of use, this product is right where it needs to be."
  • "I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period."

What is our primary use case?

We use the System Management Appliance and the System Deployment Appliance.

On the K1000 management appliance, we're running version 12.0.103 and on the K2000 deployment appliance, we're running version 8. Our solution is deployed through a virtual machine.

For the K1000, we push out the agents through a group policy and provisioning agent. For the K2000, which we have four of, we have them set up as virtual machines and they reach out through PXE boot, IPv4 PXE.

We use the K1000 to manage all of our machines. Currently, there are 1,626, which includes 20 Android devices. We have a complete scripting library where managed jobs are maintained, both ones that run now and case by case.

We also use it to distribute and manage software. We use it to repeal unwanted software. We use it to disable machines after a given amount of time and repeal them from Active Directory. It is utilized for Windows feature build updates, as well as tracking Windows patch management and Windows patching.

How has it helped my organization?

We use KACE for IT asset management, compliance, software asset management, and patch management. It can also do mobile device management, although we don't use it for that. The combination of these features in a single package is important to us. I think with the inclusion of the service desk, the ticketing station, and integration through the user interface where they can download their own software and applications at a system-wide level, I think it's a really great program. It's really hard-pressed to find all of these features in one.

Overall, it works great in terms of updating and configuring everything we need it to be for our environment. My only complaint is smart label adaptation. I do recommend a bake-in period of 24 to 48 hours to make sure everything reports, but beyond that, it's pretty seamless. You have immediate reporting. The test environments are great, and you don't have to worry about bringing a real-world solution to a real-world environment.

The K2000 system deployment appliance assists us when new machines are set up. We take brand new machines out of the box and create a complete image of them. Not only does every machine that comes in get imaged but when we have a machine that takes longer than an hour or two hours for basic repairs, we re-image it. The K2000 touches everything in our company except for Android devices.

Using KACE has definitely increased our overall IT productivity. We used to spend approximately two hours per machine, doing one machine at a time. Now we can do as many machines as we can hook up. They have an average response time of approximately 30 minutes fully loaded, fully committed to our domain, and only require a simple update to Windows to finish the process. It's a whole lot easier.

We save an hour and a half, per machine, which is exponential because we used to get one machine done every two hours, whereas now, we can do as many machines as we can hook up in 30 minutes. It saves a lot of time. We used to spend hours each day re-imaging machines and now we spend minutes per day.

What is most valuable?

My favorite features are the feature build update and managed installations. 

Using the Windows feature build update means that instead of having to do things manually or set it up through a WSUS-type environment, you can easily download the package into the K1000. From there, you can culture and cater to it and then set it up by smart labeling. Or, you can completely automate the process to where, as it checks in, you can set those intervals.

You don't have to be an advanced user. Rather, in terms of ease of use, this product is right where it needs to be. It's easy enough where a layman can do a lot of basic stuff, but it's advanced enough such that you've got to have some knowledge of what you're doing, otherwise it's just not going to work as well as you need it to. It's right on par with where it needs to be.

What needs improvement?

I have complaints about smart label adaptation and because of this, I recommend a 24 to 48 hour bake-in period. I'm not a big fan of the bake-in period, but that's going to happen because we have a two-hour report time. We've got 1,626 PCs, which means that it's just going to take time no matter what. If there is a machine that doesn't report, then it never receives that smart label.

In this case, we have what I call hanging chad, but with 1,626 machines, if we can catch 1600 of them, that's only degradation of 26. That's not bad compared to sometimes in other programs, where they don't conform at all or don't report at all.

I'm not sure what could be done to resolve this. I know that I can tell the system to report more often, but the agent reporting time of two hours is perfect because we won't have a lot of machines bogging down our infrastructure. We're running what's considered a modified MPLS and if you think about it that way, having 26 hanging chads is not terrible. The reality is that I think it's working as well as it can, given our current infrastructure.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with Quest KACE Systems Management for approximately three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Our K1000 currently manages 1,626 devices, 20 of which are Android devices.

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

We don't use the service desk feature at all. We use Zendesk, but I've been trying for years to get them to roll over and put this all in one, utilize the service desk, and just drag over what's in Zendesk into KACE. Unfortunately, I can't get them to listen.

They're hooked on Zendesk and they love the macros. This makes it hard to get them to change their process. You have to change the culture in that environment, and they're not ready to do that, yet.

What was our ROI?

The ease of use has helped to improve our return on investment. Initially, when we started with this product, I was hired to work with it. It wasn't set up the way we have it now. Over time, we got deeper into it, making it easier for the end-user but more complex for the people who need it, such as for those in administration and above. In its current state, the return on investment is pretty high.

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

There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Feature-wise, I think the only one that's even come close is Workspace ONE. It seems to get really close and deep into it. We tested them out, but we determined that they were not as viable a solution compared to KACE.

What other advice do I have?

This product is not a one-stop shop for everything that I need but it gets really close.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
IT Manager at a educational organization with 201-500 employees
Real User
Top 10
Allows us to run multiple processes in parallel
Pros and Cons
  • "I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time."
  • "I still need better communication about which processes are really due and which processes are currently being processed. According to the initial setup service provider, there is still no real management or overview on KACE where you can really see 100 percent of what is going on as well as what is going to be processed next and whether I can influence the overall process. It could really help me if I knew, e.g. exactly in 10 minutes my colleague will be supplied with this or that software. I haven't found this yet. If they could add this, that would be cool. It is still missing and I haven't yet found something like this."

What is our primary use case?

Every day, we do patching and updating of Windows Drivers. We also have to activate new software packages from firewall or VPN to Adobe software on a regular basis. We then use it very often and gladly to exchange files from directories, so people don't ask, "Please change this document to this document." We would rather do this through the system, exchanging various documents inside it. 

We do inventory to see whether:

  • A machine is working fine, e.g.. hardware load.
  • Systems are regularly shutting down. 
  • A monitor is closed on a laptop.

This is exactly how the system works.

We are currently using the K1000 appliance. We now have it as a standalone, using it for software distribution.

We also have a hardware appliance. It is not worse than the last version of the hardware appliance. We don't have a virtualized one yet, but we are going in that direction.

How has it helped my organization?

Quest KACE Systems Management provides a single pane of glass with everything that we need for endpoint management of all devices. It allows us to run multiple processes in parallel, i.e., parallelization. We have been able to assign a lot to many users at once. So, if somehow there is a critical error or a software is not working properly, then we mostly notice this on one user but can transfer the effect/result to all of them right away. That has worked very well because we don't have an internal environment to work with, which is why it is a good thing that we can achieve a lot and distribute it simultaneously.

When we had to quickly switch from Office 365 to an Office local installation, which we used to have, people were cut off from the Office 365 license from now on because we no longer paid for it. We then got a call from a department, “Our 12 employees need our university Office application that we used before." That could be implemented very quickly. People didn't have to come to us, we didn't have to go there, and everything was done without seeing each other. This was very good and flexible, and no effort was needed.

The environment is worth it when rolling out new software, and we test it on this device.

We use the system every day because there is always something that someone needs. We just take a look to see if the system is working fine.

What is most valuable?

I have an “extended arm” through this agent, where I can distribute things very quickly, even to people who are in their home office and need some software. I can assign it. Then, in a short time, if the Internet works for the remote station, everything is available as quickly as possible. Logically, this is one of the greatest and most comfortable things for me.

In terms of updating and customizing, the solution is very good and flexible.

For patch management that we do in an automated way, it is great. We just check whether everything works and is done automatically. Therefore, it provides a great help.

What needs improvement?

I still need better communication about which processes are really due and which processes are currently being processed. According to the initial setup service provider, there is still no real management or overview on KACE where you can really see 100 percent of what is going on as well as what is going to be processed next and whether I can influence the overall process. It could really help me if I knew, e.g. exactly in 10 minutes my colleague will be supplied with this or that software. I haven't found this yet. If they could add this, that would be cool. It is still missing and I haven't yet found something like this.

Sometimes, if you copy and paste someone incorrectly, then you can also assign the wrong software and that can then lead to problems where you distribute the wrong software.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution since 2017.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is indestructible.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We haven’t been scaling much. We don't have full utilization and are under 300 clients, and its scalability works.

We have two administrators and 140 users. Some users have two PCs, but most have only one PC.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support has these pages, subpages, etc. If we can't find it on the Internet, then we go through Software Factory GmbH.

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

We did not previously use another solution. We only have experience with KACE Systems Management.

How was the initial setup?

The deployment took three weeks. It's a service, so sometimes it takes awhile. The fragmented architecture that we have is a wide variety of PC systems, which was another problem. We still have different locations. In order to re-inventory them and get an overview of what is missing everywhere, we needed a strategy to make all the software identical, even if the hardware was different. This can be mapped well with this software.

What about the implementation team?

We had the initial setup done by a service provider, which was ok. However, there were still a lot of question marks. Another company really helped us later. We also used another service provider who was once a technician at Quest, working as self-employed. We came very far with him and that gave us another boost, so we achieved more productivity after he showed us a few tricks.

We are now dealing with Software Factory GmbH from Nürtingen. They are very professional and have a solution for all our problems. It does cost extra, but Software Factory GmbH from Nürtingen really knows their business. They are much better than the provider for the initial setup.

Internally, two of us were required for deployment, a colleague and me.

What was our ROI?

It has definitely proven itself very well. For at least a year now, all changes have been noticed, e.g., decentralization. Because we are in three locations, I used to always have to travel somewhere to configure various things and could do everything only that way. So, it saves time in this case. It is a very good solution.

I can reach people now that I couldn't have reached previously. We are saving about 25 percent in time.

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

We buy consulting fees from Software Factory, then we pay extra for it.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We did not evaluate other options. Our service provider back then recommended KACE Systems Management as a very good product.

My colleague who knows other software distribution systems says this solution does not rank equally with others. He would move them to third place. I am very happy with the environment. If my colleague could decide, he wouldn't buy this solution. He would buy different software.

What other advice do I have?

Spend more money on training so you can use the product to its fullest.

There is always increased usage during this coronavirus time. Almost every day, we have an increase or decrease in hardware as most people are now changing their laptops for desktop computers.

I would rate KACE somewhere near a nine (out of 10) because I am missing more control in it. 

Foreign Language: (German)


Was ist unser primärer Anwendungsfall?

Jeden Tag machen wir das Patchen und Aktualisieren von Windows Drivers. Außerdem müssen wir regelmäßig neue Softwarepakete von Firewall oder VPN bis zu Adobe-Software aktivieren. Wir verwenden es dann sehr oft und sehr gern, um Dateien aus Verzeichnissen auszutauschen, damit die Leute nicht fragen "Bitte tauschen Sie die Vorlagen gegen die Vorlagen." Wir tun dies lieber über das System, indem wir verschiedene Dokumente darin austauschen.

Wir führen auch Inventarisierung durch, um zu sehen, ob:

  • Die Maschine funktioniert einwandfrei, z.B. Hardwarelast.
  • Die Systeme werden regelmäßig heruntergefahren.
  • Ein Monitor ist auf einem Laptop zugeklappt.

Genau so funktioniert das System.

Wir verwenden derzeit die K1000-Appliance. Wir haben es jetzt als Stand-alone und wir nutzen sie zur Softwareverteilung.

Wir haben auch noch eine Hardware-Appliance. Es ist nicht schlechter als die letzte Auslieferung von der Hardware-Appliance. Wir haben noch keine virtualisierte, aber wir gehen in diese Richtung.


Wie hat es meiner Organisation geholfen?

Quest KACE Systems Management bietet eine zentrale Schnittstelle mit allem, was wir für die Endpoint Management aller Geräte benötigen. Es ermöglicht uns, mehrere Prozesse parallel auszuführen, d.h. Parallelisierung. Wir konnten vielen Benutzern auf einmal viel zuordnen. Wenn also irgendwie ein kritischer Fehler vorliegt oder eine Software nicht richtig funktioniert, dann bemerken wir dies meistens bei einem Benutzer, können die Wirkung/das Ergebnis jedoch sofort auf alle übertragen. Das hat sehr gut funktioniert, weil wir keine interne Umgebung bei uns am arbeiten haben, deswegen ist es wirklich sehr gute Sache, dass wir viel erreichen und gleichzeitig verteilen können.

Als wir schnell von Office 365 auf eine Office-Lokalinstallation umsteigen mussten, die wir früher hatten, wurden die Leute von nun an von der Office 365-Lizenz abgeschnitten, weil wir nicht mehr dafür bezahlt haben. Dann bekamen wir einen Anruf von einer Abteilung: „Unsere 12 Mitarbeiter brauchen unsere Hochschul-Office-Anwendung, die wir benutzt haben.“ Das ließ sich sehr schnell umsetzen. Die Leute mussten nicht zu uns kommen, wir mussten nicht hingehen, und es wurde eben alles sozusagen ohne dass man sich sieht erledigt. Das war sehr gut und flexibel, also kein Aufwand.

Die Umwelt lohnt sich beim Ausrollen von neuer Software und wir testen sie auf diesem Gerät.

Wir nutzen das System jeden Tag, weil es immer etwas gibt, was jemand braucht. Oder wenn wir nur reingucken, ob das System funktioniert.


Was haben wir am wertvollsten gefunden?

Ich habe durch diesen Agenten einen „verlängerten Arm“, wo ich sehr schnell Sachen verteilen kann, auch an Leute, die im Home-Office sind und Software benötigen. Ich kann es zuordnen. Dann in kurzer Zeit, wenn das Internet für die Gegenstelle funktioniert, ist alles schnellstmöglich verfügbar. Logischerweise ist dies für mich eine der tollsten und bequemsten Sache.

In Hinsicht auf Aktualisieren und Anpassen ist die Lösung sehr gut und sehr flexibel.

Für das automatisierte Patch-Management ist es großartig. Wir prüfen nur, ob alles funktioniert und das wird automatisch erledigt dann. Daher bietet es eine große Hilfe.


Was kann verbessert werden?

Ich brauche noch eine bessere Kommunikation darüber, welche Prozesse noch einstehen und welche Prozesse gerade bearbeitet werden. Nach Angaben des Ersteinrichtungsdienstleisters gibt es bei KACE noch keine wirkliche Verwaltung oder Übersicht, wo man wirklich 100 Prozent sehen kann, was gerade läuft und was als nächstes bearbeitet wird und ob ich den Gesamtprozess beeinflussen kann. Es könnte mir wirklich helfen, wenn ich wüsste, z.B. genau in 10 Minuten wird mein Kollege mit dieser oder jener Software versorgt. Das habe ich noch nicht gefunden. Wenn sie das hinzufügen könnten, wäre das toll. Es fehlt noch und ich habe so etwas noch nicht gefunden.

Manchmal, wenn Sie jemanden falsch kopieren und einfügen, können Sie auch die falsche Software zuweisen und das kann dann zu Problemen führen, wenn Sie die falsche Software verteilen.


Wie lange habe ich die Lösung verwendet?

Wir verwenden diese Lösung seit 2017.


Was halte ich von der Stabilität der Lösung?

Die Stabilität ist unverwüstlich.


Was denke ich über die Skalierbarkeit der Lösung?

Wir haben nicht viel skaliert. Wir haben keine volle Auslastung und haben weniger als 300 Clients, und die Skalierbarkeit funktioniert gut.

Wir haben zwei Administratoren und 140 Benutzer. Einige Benutzer haben zwei PCs, aber die meisten haben nur einen PC.


Wie sind Kundenservice und technischer Support?

Der technische Support hat diese Seiten, Unterseiten etc. Sollten wir etwas im Internet nicht finden, dann wenden wir uns an die Software Factory GmbH.


Welche Lösung habe ich vorher verwendet und warum habe ich gewechselt?

Wir haben vorher keine andere Lösung verwendet. Wir haben nur Erfahrung mit KACE Systems Management.


Wie war die Ersteinrichtung?

Der Einsatz dauerte ca. drei Wochen. Es ist ein Service, daher dauert es manchmal eine Weile. Die fragmentierte Architektur, die wir haben, besteht aus einer Vielzahl von PC-Systemen, was ein weiteres Problem war. Wir haben noch verschiedene Standorte. Um sie neu zu inventarisieren und einen Überblick darüber zu bekommen, was überall fehlt, brauchten wir eine Strategie, um die gesamte Software baugleich zu machen, auch wenn die Hardware unterschiedlich war. Dies lässt sich mit dieser Software gut abbilden.


Was ist mit dem Implementierungsteam?

Wir haben die Ersteinrichtung von einem Dienstleister durchführen lassen, was ok war. Allerdings gab es noch viele Fragezeichen. Eine andere Firma hat uns später wirklich geholfen. Wir haben auch einen anderen Dienstleister eingesetzt, der früher als Techniker bei Quest tätig war, dann selbstständig gemacht hat. Wir sind mit ihm sehr weit gekommen und das hat uns einen weiteren Schub gegeben, so dass wir mehr Produktivität erreicht haben, nachdem er uns ein paar Tricks gezeigt hat.

Wir haben es jetzt mit der Software Factory GmbH aus Nürtingen zu tun. Sie sind sehr professionell und haben eine Lösung für alle unsere Probleme. Kostet zwar extra, aber die sind wirklich sehr auf Zack. Sie sind viel besser als der Anbieter für die Ersteinrichtung.

Intern waren zwei von uns für den Einsatz erforderlich, ein Kollege und ich.


Was war unser ROI?

Es hat sich definitiv sehr gut bewährt. Seit mindestens einem Jahr sind alle Veränderungen, wie z.B. die Dezentralisierung, aufgefallen. Da wir an drei Standorten sind, musste ich früher immer irgendwo hinfahren, um verschiedene Dinge zu konfigurieren und konnte alles nur so machen. Das spart in diesem Fall also Zeit. Es ist eine sehr gute Lösung.

Ich kann jetzt Leute erreichen, die ich vorher nicht erreichen konnte. Wir sparen rund 25% Zeit.


Wie sind meine Erfahrungen mit Preisen, Einrichtungskosten und Lizenzierung?

Wir zahlen Beratungshonorare von der Software Factory, dann zahlen wir extra dafür.


Welche anderen Lösungen habe ich in Betracht gezogen?

Andere Optionen haben wir nicht in Betracht gezogen. Unser Dienstleister hat KACE Systems Management damals als sehr gutes Produkt empfohlen.

Mein Kollege, der andere Softwareverteilungssysteme kennt, sagt, dass diese Lösung nicht gleichrangig mit anderen ist. Er würde sie auf Platz 3 schieben. Ich bin sehr zufrieden mit der Umgebung. Wenn mein Kollege entscheiden könnte, würde er diese Lösung nicht kaufen. Er würde andere Software kaufen.


Welche anderen Ratschläge habe ich?

Geben Sie mehr Geld für Schulung aus, damit Sie das Produkt vollgablich nutzen können.

Es gibt immer eine erhöhte Nutzung während dieser Corona-Zeit. Fast jeden Tag haben wir eine Zunahme oder Abnahme der Hardware, da die meisten Leute jetzt ihre Laptops gegen Desktop-Computer austauschen.

Ich würde KACE irgendwo in der Nähe einer Neun (von 10) bewerten, weil mir mehr Kontrolle fehlt.


Welche Version dieser Lösung verwenden Sie derzeit?

K1000

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Scott Tweed - PeerSpot reviewer
Windows Engineer at a tech services company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
Low maintenance, reliable, and easy to create packages
Pros and Cons
  • "I like how when you click on the device, it shows you everything that has changed as well as the software versioning. I am really enjoying the inventory aspect of it."
  • "The labeling process should be more streamlined. It should be easier to do. It gets confusing at times."

What is our primary use case?

We use Quest KACE Systems Management for things like deploying software packages, inventorying, and versioning what we currently have.

For me, specifically, the use case is for package deployment. When I need to push out a new package. We use a new 8x8 client, or I have Chrome set to update, and if it doesn't, we'll post it here. We use this solution to push packages because we don't have an SCCM solution or anything similar that I am more familiar with.

SCCM is a Microsoft solution, which is now known as MECM.

How has it helped my organization?

Right now, it's just a stopgap until we can set up and configure a proper environment. This product was acquired and brought over from an acquisition. As a result, there is some net overlapping and other issues that prevent it from being fully integrated everywhere, and there is a problem with firewall separation. 

It helps in some ways, and for the most part, it makes my life easier. It doesn't seem to hit everywhere.

What is most valuable?

I like how when you click on the device, it shows you everything that has changed as well as the software versioning. I am really enjoying the inventory aspect of it.

The deployment process for both deploying and creating a package is straightforward.

I believe the inventory in KACE is superior to SCCM's. 

I know with SCCM I could do things like remote console into machines via the agent's remote console, but that is not a feature that is provided in KACE. I know that at least in the Systems Management Appliance, I can't get to it.

I'm not sure how distribution works, with distribution points. I'm not sure if KACE has that feature. You could use an SCCM to set up distribution points at remote sites so that they don't have to download patches or software from across the country. If you have a DP or something similar, they could pull it down.

What needs improvement?

With KACE, you have to use smart labels and groups, and it can be annoying. It's aggravating if you don't know what you're doing because you have to figure out how to do it.

In terms of improvement, I would recommend the labeling process, also known as label management. With  SCCM, you have collections, here they do Label management.

The labeling process should be more streamlined. It should be easier to do. It gets confusing at times.

The only issue I have is with label creation.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Quest KACE Systems Management for nine months.

We are not working with the latest version. I don't see a way of determining the version, but It wouldn't be the most recent because even the application catalog is out of date, and the company decided not to purchase a new software catalog.

I believe that it is hybrid because I'm aware of a machine that checks in but isn't in our environment. It's a machine that was given to an employee and was never re-imaged. I'm aware that the client logs in from time to time. They have to re-image it to remove the agent, and then it will stop popping in. As a result, it's a hybrid.

I'm not very familiar with it. I was never taught how to do it. 

Everything I learned from experimenting with it for tasks that were assigned to me. There was no training.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

I believe that once the agent is installed on a machine, it is very reliable. It easily tells you when it last logged in. You don't have to search for it. Aside from the labels, I believe it would be a great tool to use if properly configured with proper access everywhere.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have approximately 800 employees with 67 to 71 data centers.

We don't have a lot of machines in there for scalability. We only have about 300 or 400 people out of a total of 12 or 13. I can't respond to that. 

We had 7,000 employees in the last environment I worked in, and SCCM handled it all with the 300 or 400 domain controllers we had. I can't comment on this because we don't have a large enough environment.

We have 200 or 300 users in our organization.

It is not being extensively used because it is only hitting approximately 30% of the machines. Because this is pushing toward workstations. 

I don't believe that we have plans to increase our usage. That's why we started looking for a third party. I don't think they're heading for KACE. I believe they're discussing BigFix right now, but that's a different department, and we could be drawn into that.

How are customer service and support?

I have never had to contact technical support.

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

We use an internal application. For ticketing or our change management process, we don't use any solutions such as ServiceNow, Remedy, or Magic.

I'm not involved in networking. I work in internal IT. As a result, they use Palo Altos and Ciscos.

WSUS and KACE are currently in use.

At my previous job, I used SCCM, System Center Configuration Manager.

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved with the initial setup. I came to it in the state that it's in.

I am responsible for the maintenance of this solution. It does not require a lot of maintenance. It is truly low-maintenance. However, we do not send patches via KACE. We use WSUS to distribute patches. If there isn't anything for me to do in KACE, there isn't anything for me to do. If there isn't a new package coming out, maintenance is minimal, and the agent is pushed using a GPO, leaving nothing to do until we deploy agents, which is handled by the GPO.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I was only looking for something to patch our internal workstations and servers, not anything for customers.

What other advice do I have?

I would suggest taking a training course. Take a training course on its fundamental administration. That would've been nice because it would've probably helped me with label creation and other things like that. Even though the KBE isn't too bad, you'll need to figure out who has the account in order to log into their knowledge base.

I would give it an eight out of ten, but I haven't seen everything it's capable of. And the reason I say that is because I have 10 years of SCCM experience. I love SCCM, this isn't as bad, but I can't really compare this to that. 

I really like what I am seeing, I would rate Quest KACE Systems Management an eight out of ten. I can't rate it any higher than that.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud

If public cloud, private cloud, or hybrid cloud, which cloud provider do you use?

Amazon Web Services (AWS)
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
Systems Engineer at a financial services firm with 51-200 employees
Real User
Provides us with high visibility into the software versions on all our assets
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable feature is the ability to monitor updates—the software versions—on machines so that we can keep everything compliant."
  • "The K1000 doesn't communicate well with some clients without SMB. There are some issues with getting things to image correctly because they rely on SMB, and SMB is a protocol that is being removed due to security reasons. Organizations are trying to rely less and less on SMB. I know Quest is aware of it. They've talked about having a new version that wouldn't rely on SMB for connection to the clients, but they haven't gotten there yet."

What is our primary use case?

We use it for asset management for PCs and servers, and for doing updates. We also use it for monitoring all of our systems to keep them compliant with Windows updates or server updates. In addition, we use it to deploy and to uninstall software, and we use the Service Desk.

We're using Quest's K1000, which is the asset manager, and we're using the K2000, which is the deployment appliance.

How has it helped my organization?

The way it helps us is the easy organization and visibility that it gives into the software versions that are on our assets. It doesn't necessarily provide the solution but it provides us with high visibility into where we're at on all our assets. We can then address the different deployments to get things up to date pretty quickly.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the ability to monitor updates—the software versions—on machines so that we can keep everything compliant. We're very highly monitored because we are a financial institution. We have audits all the time and they look for vulnerabilities. So we try to keep everything to the latest software versions and firmware versions. We use KACE to monitor those.

What needs improvement?

The K1000 doesn't communicate well with some clients without SMB. There are some issues with getting things to image correctly because they rely on SMB, and SMB is a protocol that is being removed due to security reasons. Organizations are trying to rely less and less on SMB. I know Quest is aware of it. They've talked about having a new version that wouldn't rely on SMB for connection to the clients, but they haven't gotten there yet.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the Quest KACE Systems Management for four years. We're using 12.01.49 and we've been on it for about a month. We update pretty much every time updates become available.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The KACE solution is solid. We haven't had any issues with functionality.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's definitely easy to scale out. We've had to add licenses as our environment has grown. We haven't had any problems there. We haven't hit our heads on any capacity issues.

We're using it to the capacity that we need to. We do most of our software deployment through it and we do about 150 to 200 tickets a month through the Service Desk.

How are customer service and support?

Any time I've had to deal with their technical support, they've responded quickly and they're pretty thorough in getting things resolved.

For example, about six months ago, one of the updates didn't deploy correctly. I was doing it on a Saturday because I didn't want to interrupt production. It didn't go well, and a gentleman from Quest support jumped on and he went through it that day and we got it resolved. He knew what code needed to be executed manually and he worked through the problem and had us up within a couple of hours.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is pretty involved because you have to set up Service Desk and you've got to set up all your environment labels for the different assets. As a part of purchasing the appliance, you do get to buy some services to help you get it set up in your environment, and that was a great purchase. They assisted us a lot in getting the Service Desk, and some of our labeling and environment, set up to get us going.

Between the two appliances, the deployment took pretty close to a week.

In terms of an implementation strategy, the first part was to get the Service Desk up and running on the K1000. Then we went to the K2000 with imaging and deployment through that.

We have about 85 to 90 people using the Service Desk, and we have five people in our IT department who administer the system. While they don't do so full-time, we have three people who do the admin work on the KACE appliance. One is responsible for software deployment, and the other two do most of the updates, as well as the monitoring of updates and vulnerabilities on computers, and pushing the patches through KACE. And we have four people who monitor the Service Desk in KACE. One is a basic Service Desk individual and the other three are systems admins who overlap and help out.

What about the implementation team?

At the time when we bought it, it was a Dell product. Since then, Dell sold it to Quest. Dell provided a third party to help with the installation.

What was our ROI?

The solution has saved us a ton of time in several areas. We spend tremendously less time—probably 80 percent less—on updating now, versus before we had KACE.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I was using Microsoft SCCM in my previous environment and I replaced it with KACE. When I came to this new environment we put KACE in. Compared to SCCM, it's a lot better. With SCCM, when I was trying to push updates or get the stuff to function, the way it was designed it was more difficult. Usually, if I set up a script with KACE, it doesn't take long to get it to run successfully. Whether it's scripting or installing, it seems to be much smoother with the KACE product. The improvements are in deploying Windows and server updates automatically, on schedule.

We got rid of SCCM because we got out of our Microsoft licensing agreement at the time, and it was covered under that. And it just wasn't effective for us. We had a lot of issues with it.

There were a couple of us in IT who had used KACE in previous environments and we liked it, so we made the recommendation and moved forward with it.

What other advice do I have?

Its ease of use is an eight out of 10. Some things can be a little difficult to find, but support's always there to help if we can't figure something out.

For both appliances, the K1000 and the K2000, make sure that you purchase the support for the deployment and get Quest's assistance in getting it set up properly for your environment. With the K2000, we got it set up with their support and then one of our technicians went in and started changing things and really set it in the wrong direction. Their support will help you start out on a firm foundation.

Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Shailesh Naidu - PeerSpot reviewer
Sr. Systems Engineer at a university with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Saves us significant time when patching hundreds of servers
Pros and Cons
  • "Patching is definitely the most valuable feature. It gives us good, centralized software, which comes in very handy since we are doing 400 servers at a time. It enables us to manage all the servers, and to deal with the application team regarding reboots and scheduling."
  • "One of the complications is that they don't have 24/7 support, and they're also not in our time zone... Sometimes, no matter how critical my application is, if my production server is down I won't be able to connect with anybody till 11:00 AM Eastern Standard Time."

What is our primary use case?

I usually use it for deploying patches, as well as for inventory, and sometimes even monitoring. KACE Systems Management is deployed through physical hardware. We have two of them. We use one for desktops and laptops, and we use the other for our servers.

We are part of a university, working under the president's office. We collaborate with all six campuses and have students from all six campuses interacting with us. To fulfill their requirements, we need tools for monitoring, patch management, and for inventory. KACE Systems Management is how we keep our customers and stakeholders happy.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution definitely saves us time. We try to do bulk patching, whereas before, we did manual patching. We used to have four people putting in 40 hours, and now we have one person doing it in 16 hours. That's quite a savings.

In addition, it has increased IT productivity. With one person responsible for installing patches, we have freed up the other three people to take more ownership of our applications. If I had to work on patching on a manual basis, that would be the only thing I'd be doing. But because this is all automated and scripted very well, I can use my time for other projects.

What is most valuable?

Patching is definitely the most valuable feature. It gives us good, centralized software, which comes in very handy since we are doing 400 servers at a time. It enables us to manage all the servers, and to deal with the application team regarding reboots and scheduling.

On a scale of one to 10, the ease of use of the solution is definitely a nine.

The solution provides us with compliance, software asset management, mobile device management, and patch management. This combination satisfies my needs, giving me almost everything I need on this box.

What needs improvement?

The things the solution is missing are antivirus software and monitoring software. The types of monitoring I'm referring to here are calculating data, making sure the machines are up and running, CPU monitoring, data monitoring, and SLAs.

Also, I don't think they have a good cloud solution yet. We wanted to go with a cloud-based application, but they were not ready yet. That's where everybody's going. Two or three years from now, when we have to renew the contract, if management asks for a better deal it will be embarrassing to say "Yeah, we have a product that's not in the cloud." We are taking a lot of our own machines to the cloud and creating our own cloud-based solution for our customers. I would like Quest to do the same thing for us.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using the KACE solution for close to 10 years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is pretty good, although it's not perfect. There are a lot of upgrades as they keep sending a lot of bug fixes. Any update or upgrade to a product that occurs more than once in a year is a lot. Quest releases two or three upgrades. So it becomes a little time-consuming, because we have to make other people aware of it and get change-control and everybody to sign off on them. Their upgrades come out quite often, a little more frequently than other applications.

We keep upgrading the solution. We keep up with Quest on their new solutions, every time they do an upgrade.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We do patching every four months, so that's our key project. At those times, we are using it every day for 16 hours a day. But the inventory base and the little bit of monitoring that it supplies, as well as the software distribution, mean that we use it on an almost a daily basis, although not that heavily, during those times.

We have about 12 administrators of the solution, but the beneficiaries from it number about 600.

How are customer service and support?

I'm very impressed with their technical support. It's pretty good.

One thing that could be a little better is that, even though it's not 24/7 support, at least it should be available from nine to five in every time zone, or even better, from 7:00 AM to 7:00 PM in every time zone. I can understand not being able to reach somebody at 3:00 AM, but somebody should be able to call me at seven or 8:00 AM, because that's when business starts. Sometimes, no matter how critical my application is, if my production server is down I won't be able to connect with anybody till 11:00 AM Eastern Standard Time.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

I was not involved in the initial setup, but I don't think it would be that complex. I have done a lot of other setups with Quest and there are a few complications. It's not a cakewalk. The deployment took almost a week.

One of the complications is that they don't have 24/7 support, and they're also not in our time zone.

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

I don't have to deal with the pricing and it does get renewed automatically for us every time. But the pricing does get confusing for me. Our system is a little complicated because we have two appliances, one dealing with just the laptops and desktops, one dealing with only the servers.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

There was a stage where I had to evaluate other vendors. KACE had a better GUI. The front end is user-friendly, even though the back end is Linux-based. Their format and their design were much better and much more comfortable.

What other advice do I have?

I would definitely recommend using KACE. There are cons when it comes to the support and not being able to go to the cloud, and a couple of features missing, but I would definitely recommend them.

I like the solution. The things that we are using KACE for are working pretty well for us. I have had the opportunity to change vendors three times during this nine-year process, but I am comfortable with KACE. I'm not getting everything I want, but on a scale of 1 to 100, I'm getting at least 70 from KACE. So I keep signing with them.

The solution provides a single pane of glass with very close to everything I need for endpoint management of all devices. It meets my needs but for some applications we use other software, mostly for monitoring or pushing software development. But I'm happy with what I have from KACE.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: PeerSpot contacted the reviewer to collect the review and to validate authenticity. The reviewer was referred by the vendor, but the review is not subject to editing or approval by the vendor.
PeerSpot user
Network systems Administrator at Azura Credit Union
User
Great for building scripts, is active on forums, and can scale well
Pros and Cons
  • "The ability to build scripts right on the deployment center itself, as well as building groups that take those scripts/task chains has been absolutely invaluable and one of the most important parts of my whole environment."
  • "The GUI needs some work. I love all that it can do, however, it can be just be so cluttered at times."

What is our primary use case?

We Primarily use KACE as a diverse deployment and management solution. 

Our environment includes multiple locations, so having a single point of deployment for automation/patches/software/scripts and response management is ideal. 

We work in the banking industry, so having this single point and not having to worry about security is enormous. We have to go through multiple government security audits a year and our auditors are always blown away with our KACE environment. We need KACE to keep our organization going.

How has it helped my organization?

Previously, we were working with upwards of 200 different applications and tools, the amount of compatibility issues and clutter was unbelievable. One update on one application could ruin a whole environment at times. Thank goodness we found KACE to consolidate our environment and really cut down on resources! 

They've saved us so much time and money it's unreal. They have so much flexibility in what you want to configure or script. In some of my deployments, I've built entire applications on KACE to work with, while in others I have small built-in batch files. The only thing that limits KACE is your imagination.

What is most valuable?

The ability to build scripts right on the deployment center itself, as well as building groups that take those scripts/task chains has been absolutely invaluable and one of the most important parts of my whole environment. Without it, we would need to hire at least six to seven more employees to do what I'm able to do myself with those tools. 

On top of this, they have multiple forums that are super active. I've gone to tech support, ITninja, and even Reddit. One time, I asked a question on the KACE subReddit on how to improve a function and a KACE team member responded in five minutes. That's honestly unheard of for a company like this.

What needs improvement?

The GUI needs some work. I love all that it can do, however, it can be just be so cluttered at times. I wish we could see them spend some time improving the interface.

Sometimes when I run certain functions or need to do a one-off massive deployment, it lacks in "mobility". It can be a pain, having to go back a page and re-type in all the same information in the "run now" tab when I have a whole bunch of one-off situations. It's not like I can't do what I need to do, however, I seem to just spend more time than I'd like having to type in the same information over and over.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've used the solution for the past five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

In all the years we've had this product we've never had a stability issue.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution can scale. The product can be a help desk ticket system, all the way up to the entirety of your virtual machine environment - making updates and changes at a click of a button.

How are customer service and support?

They take their role in support extremely seriously. We don't have to reach out too often due to the lack of problems, however, when we do, they respond within an hour or two at the very longest.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

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

We did not use another solution. Once we got KACE, I just don't understand how we held on for so long without it.

How was the initial setup?

We had a vendor assist us so that we never had a single hiccup during the entire setup.

What about the implementation team?

The vendor was, without a doubt, an expert. We assisted and learned everything they could teach us.

What was our ROI?

We had ROI about a year into this and have saved so much ever since.

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

If your team is small like ours, I highly recommend working with an install vendor. For us, it wasn't as much a technically challenging thing to implement as much as what the vendor showed us during setup and installation that was just so helpful. With their help, we were able to hit the ground running and had much less of a learning curve.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

Other options were discussed however, it was so long ago I can't recall what they were.

What other advice do I have?

I would say start by looking at all of the services/products that KACE offers - don't feel overwhelmed as they will integrate very well with each other.

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.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Quest KACE Systems Management Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: November 2022
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Quest KACE Systems Management Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.