Quest KACE Systems Management Reviews

I use this solution for software packages, security updates, upgrades, and asset management.

The Microsoft SCCM environment is much more robust than KACE, but obviously, Microsoft equipment or Microsoft software is very expensive, so we have decided to take a cheaper alternative. It was a Dell product and we have a Dell computer base, so it was easier. There is ease of use, and its pricing was a driving factor.

Sometimes the information is not as real time as it's supposed to be. In that scenario, they have to work with Microsoft and figure it out, because I think that's the challenge that we always come across. The information we get isn't always 100% accurate.

There could be a dynamic environment where you can select what products you're using, whether it's Dell or IBM or HPE, and it creates its own repository. When there's not much internet usage, it downloads those critical patches or firmware updates so you can push it. 

I think that kind of thing will make it much better, because I think Microsoft products are only geared toward Microsoft. I think because KACE is not a Dell product anymore, it can work as a vendor independent or vendor agnostic approach where you can select which products that you are using, which models that you are using, and based on that, it can tell you there is an update or firmware upgrade that's available for this particular product or this particular model. If I forget to research what's available on the internet and the latest firmware upgrade, the tool itself could go every night and fetch whatever is the important update or upgrades that is available, download it, and tell the admin, "In your environment, these are the things that you can upgrade." Some of the work can be automated.

I have been using this solution for about 10 years.

I would rate this solution 8 out 10.

We have to do a lot of things manually, which I don't like in a tool because  automation is the key to everything. The less human interaction that a tool can provide, the better the product will be.

We use the solution for managing our fleet of approximately 1,500 devices. This includes Windows patch management and version control, scripting deployment to workstations as well as managed software deployment to groups and individuals. 

It is also used for creating reports for software use, patching records, and auditing the workstation fleet. We like being able to create custom reports based on any number of internal fields, and the ability to have custom inventory fields too. With it, we can deploy complex software solutions in a controlled manner.

Quest KACE has provided us with a managed environment that surpasses all expectations. The information available via KACE is up to date, critical to our normal operations, and has become the go-to tool of our IT teams for extended support. In our classroom environment, it has saved a lot of time in software deployment.

Having a full report of our estate, which version of Windows is running, whether the device is encrypted, is running the latest AV solution, when the support runs until, et cetera, has been vital. It allows us to maintain a service desk that has all of the most up-to-date information on all workstations.

Full auditing of the Windows estate is the most valuable aspect for us. We are aware this solution can do Apple and Linux-based integration too, however, we simply haven't had the time to explore this so far. 

The managed software deployment is great. We like ensuring a single managed solution can be deployed - rather than having to do a custom install, which is time consuming and error-prone.

Scripting deployment for configuration, removal, or reporting is helpful as well. This has allowed us to ensure we are currently using our workstations and they are correctly implemented for end-users.

The solution needs to add:

• Automated software deployment, rather than manually having to create uninstall packages and running this against a number of manually entered devices. 
• Driver feeds for devices outside of Dell ownership.
• The ability to push out managed feature updates from Microsoft in a more seamless way.
• The ability to integrate quickly with workstations to push out tests/patches.

There is a Resolve issue whereby some workstations no longer report/check-in after a recent update. This is now an open case with Quest Support.

There is a Resolve issue whereby we cannot migrate between VMware hosts.

We have been Quest KACE customers for approximately five years now. We have used the K1000 for device management and K2000 for asset deployment.

The stability is great - it simply never fails!

Scalability is very good. We've been able to expand several times, expanding the number of devices covered with ease. We have also utilised the cloud-based MDM solutions, however, this isn't something we've maintained a licence for due to internal staffing resources.

We have successfully moved away from a hardware-based solution and moved into a virtualised VMWare estate. This has allowed us to integrate the backups of this product within our organisational estate, plus allowed us to migrate the services across various parts of our network, without having to physically change the location of the hardware. This is a great solution for us and removed any hardware blockers that were in place previously and to take advantage of the virtualisation advantages without any major changes to our client estate.

We previously used Acronis to do very basic duplicate systems.

The solution is very easy to get set up and push out clients to our workstations for deployment. It is now used as our only solution to image and deploy workstations!

As with many platforms, the more you can put in, the better the solution will function. The time taken to deploy complex packages can be time-consuming, but this is outside of the KACE environment directly.

Licencing has been quite simple throughout. We have successfully expanded our support numerous times, including additional features and devices.

We did not previously evaluate other options. 

We use KACE SMA and KACE SDA. We use all but a few of the features that both appliances have to offer. We are in a VM environment with the KACE SMA, however, we use a physical appliance for the SDA.  

The ticketing system, real-time inventory, patching, software license, and imaging are commonly used. We also use this for scans - with this and aggressive patching we have been able to pass several outside pen tests. Scripts are used to push out software so the clients don't have to wait and it takes the pressure off of the technicians.

The solution has helped with real-time inventory, advertising and pushing out software, patching, and oval and SCAP scans. We can get the majority of what we need with this product and do not have to spend money on something else. 

In terms of imaging, we don't have to have an image for every model of Dell computer we have due to drivers. The SDA pulls and installs the correct drivers for each model. 

Post-installation tasks make it easy to add or remove software to images without having to download, change the image, and upload them back onto the server.

The streamlined processes and procedures are great. Automating processes is helpful. Patching is huge as it's set it and forget it for the most part. Real-time software and hardware inventory is great. 

We can track software licenses in one place. We can have a ticketing system and be able to create processes so that when one ticket closes, the next one is assigned in the process. 

Being able to add and remove software from images without having to recreate the image every time is helpful. 

Being able to create labels to group items we want to keep track of makes it very easy for us. 

The notifications (up to 60 days pre-renewal for contracts) are a great way to know when a renewal is coming instead of finding out last minute. 

The ticketing system works for us and we like using it. That said, some processes that seem like they should be simple either can't be done or are cumbersome in setting them up. I managed a different ticketing system previously and we were able to have certain questions come up for the client based on the category picked. It was easy to set up and use. Being able to auto have a KB article with questions needed for certain categories easily auto inserted into the ticket based on category was also an option. 

There may be a good reason why some things are not easily able to be done, yet it needs work to compete with some of the other ticketing systems out there now.

I've been using the solution since 2010.

We had a few different solutions. We had an access database we were using for ticketing and inventory, and patching was manual. Imaging was with a product that required an image for every different model of computer we had.

The setup was straightforward.

We worked with a vendor team, and they were excellent.

We can do more with less staff. And, unfortunately, due to budgeting, we now have fewer staff.

The cost is reasonable. I would definitely take the JumpStart training that is offered as it helps to get you started.

We evaluated an in-house system, School Dude, and a ticketing system that is no longer in business.

We use the KACE solution for endpoint management, since our posture is based on endpoints. We have almost 2,000 endpoints.

We have two KACE boxes. It's not a virtual appliance, it is a physical appliance.

It's not only saving time but increasing IT productivity. If you have a KACE box, you're going to save a lot. Having KACE is a blessing for IT administrators for endpoint management. They can do a lot of work remotely, as well as troubleshooting, mass deployment, and mass uninstallation. KACE is very intelligent and it has its own uninstaller.

An example of how KACE helped is that there was a McAfee service-provider who was visiting us to do a McAfee upgrade for our antivirus system. They are experienced people, the subject matter experts for deploying McAfee, the client, the agent, et cetera. He was having an issue uninstalling a McAfee firewall client. If you deploy a McAfee in your network, the uninstaller should be from McAfee, but the uninstaller from McAfee was an outdated version. Uninstalling the firewall client from McAfee requires a lot of effort. It's not impossible, but it's time-consuming and if you try to uninstall from the control panel, of course it won't allow you. There is a popup for the password and, without that, a lot of problems are going to occur. 

He told me he was facing this issue. The solution for uninstalling it was provided by KACE. I demonstrated it to him for one of our clients and he was shocked. He started writing that command, and the next day he sent me a text message, saying, "Thank you. You made my life easier." He gave that command to another customer, a client of his who is an IT administrator, to run that command via a batch file to all the end-users, because they didn't have KACE. 

For an IT department in any organization that pays for endpoint management, KACE is really a blessing for them.

The most valuable feature of KACE is the mass package deployment. There are a lot of endpoint management solutions in the market. The way KACE responds is with the installation management feature, which is done in a very intelligent way, as well as scripting. It's wow. It's really wow. On top of that, there is a mass undeployment feature as well.

For example, we had an issue a while back where there was a plugin for the SAP module being deployed to almost 1,800 computers. It was taking a backup, restarting the machine, and updating it automatically. Our end-users were complaining every day. We were receiving hundreds of calls. We found out that the issue was this plugin. It was updating and restarting machines without informing the users. When we did inventory, we started finding this application, but we didn't know about the history of that application. Luckily, KACE gave us an uninstallation path, the command line. When we deployed it, believe it or not, it worked as a massive uninstallation feature and it took care of almost 1,800 computers within one hour.

It's really very time-saving stuff. It's all up to you, how you are going to utilize KACE, but if you know the way, the features are very user-friendly and it does not require scripting. There are built-in features where you can build your own script and execute it remotely through KACE. 

I have never officially worked on the service desk model of KACE, but when I went through it, it was fine. It's good for a small IT department. It's more than enough. It has asset inventory and printer inventory. You enable the SNMP features and you can get reports on printers and even printer cartridge utilization reports. It's a very handy tool for organizations that have a lot of endpoints in place.

We also used the Systems Deployment Appliance for Windows 7. Now, we are planning to use it for the Windows 10 upgrade for the rest of our machines. If you're going to capture the image of a machine and re-image that machine, it's great. Over the network, it took us 18 minutes to deploy 19 GB of images. And that was not on the same campus. It was a remote campus. For the same campus, we also used it to deploy and it took us, I think, 16 minutes and a few seconds for almost 18 GB of Windows 7 images.

There are a lot of nice features.

There is a module for agent management when you right-click on the inventory. If you want to connect remotely you can do so. But sometimes the agent check-in does not happen. You can do the first check-in through a script, at the same time. 

But there should be a mini toolbox, like the competitors of KACE have, with the small features for KACE administrators. That would make their lives easier. If you are troubleshooting a specific endpoint, remote control is available as is Wake-on-LAN. But if you want to execute some commands, you have to use a third-party tool, the PS tool. If they would integrate those small things, it would make KACE more powerful.

I have been using Quest KACE Systems Management for almost five years.

Initially, four years back, we were having a lot of issues with the KACE agent. But as the solution has grown, the maturity level has really increased and the stability and the reliability have as well. My KACE machine has not been down for a single day in the last five years. It's a very stable product.

It's really reliable now and very intelligent on top of that. When we do a mass deployment, there isn't a single day when my network admin asks me, "Why are you deploying this?" I deployed Office 2013 with KACE, in a massive way, and our network guys never said, "Oh, we can see there is a bandwidth spike." The way that KACE intelligently deploys and manages installation is great. It's really kind of a miracle. I believe that they select a group, copy the file over the network to the cache of the local machine, execute the command, and then install the media file on the local machine.

KACE is very scalable.

We started with 700 clients and today we are at almost 2,000 clients. There hasn't been a single day where I have been concerned about the scalability or the of KACE. 

Quest Support for KACE is good. They are responsive and they always give you a solution in a  timely manner. 

We faced a problem two or three years back, an issue with the inventory of Forescout Secure Connector. We could not find out how many machines had Secure Connect Connector because it's installed as a service. It was a very complex problem for us and KACE support came up with a solution: Create a new, customized inventory to get Secure Connect to be considered as a process. On that basis, we had a new entry and this solved our problem.

We have not used another asset management solution in this organization. I did use SCCM in my old company.

For us, the initial setup was not complex. The problem was that the environment, the network we work in, is a very restrictive environment. We have a lot of firewall policies and a layer of firewalls across the network. Because of the complex network architecture, we struggled a bit with the network discovery of the endpoints. We used one of the best practices: Do auto-discovery and then apply the agents.

At that point in time, I didn't really know KACE. It was a new box. I started discovering what would be next. The next thing that happened was another blessing from KACE which was having it do the Active Directory group policy deployment for the agents. I deployed it and that discovery was running for almost a week, but we started installing the agent within about four to five days. It was time-consuming. It took us two weeks because we ran it organization-to-organization because it would have slowed down the network. We did not want to take any risks. If we had taken the risk, it wouldn't have been an issue, as far as the KACE agent deployment is concerned. 

Now, whenever a new machine comes into our network, the KACE agent is automatically installed. Right after that, KACE is installing one of our NEC client agents automatically. Then, KACE will discover that this machine is a part of the McAfee agent, and if it is not, it will automatically install the McAfee agent. Then I configure McAfee to sync with Active Directory. 

So for us, when a new machine is joining, the desktop engineer will run only one command, GPUpdate. The machine will restart and then all the group policies, the KACE policies will be deployed. KACE will then install all of our small plugins automatically and they're good to go.

One of the best parts of KACE is when you go for a version upgrade. Once you do a version upgrade for any KACE module—any KACE virtual appliance or physical appliance—it's very user-friendly. In addition, the agent upgrade is a miracle. When you do the agent upgrade for the KACE appliance for the first time, it's "super-wow". The last upgrade I did was for almost 1,900 PCs, and all the agents were updated automatically when I upgraded the agent package. It took only 24 hours.

I am the only KACE administrator in our organization, but there are desktop engineers who log in to KACE. They review machines, but I do all the administration and configuration. They use it to take inventory or check the memory and see what replacements are required. They are read-only administrators.

We have seen a lot of return on our investment in KACE. One area is headcount. We are a military hospital. Imagine having 2,000 computers on the ground in different remote locations, yet having only seven desktop support engineers. If you do the math, there should be no way that seven desktop engineers can support 2,000 endpoints. Even the best-case scenario is one engineer working with 100 desktop machines, max. That gives you an idea of the headcount savings.

We are also saving on the licensing fee, compared to other endpoint management solutions.

KACE is very easy to use and user-friendly compared to the other endpoint management tools, like Microsoft SCCM and other third-party tools, in terms of IT administration. Compared to its competitors, it's easy to get machine inventory.

If any organization wants to manage its endpoints, having KACE, as I said, is a blessing for the IT administrators.

I would give it an eight out of 10. I am being demanding because there are some more improvements that can be made. But KACE can be a superpower in endpoint management.

Our primary use case for using this product is as a ticketing solution. 

This product made the job easy to do without having to go put hands on the machines.

I love the integration with Bomgar. It really helped a lot.

The way we were set up, we had multiple campuses across multiple counties. And even with just our downtown campus, you're looking at fifteen different buildings, a hundred different classrooms, and offices everywhere. So for us, the ability to push an image to a machine, wake that image up, and just blast a new image to a computer without even having to touch it, and then push the software to that machine. This just made things so much more convenient for us and so much more efficient than having to go find that machine, pull that machine out, take it back to the shop, and repair it from there.

Just having those tools made the job so much easier and so much more efficient. But they really just don't need the people that they used to have ten years ago.

The biggest problem we had with Quest KACE, with the K2000, imaging becomes a problem when you start to try to go beyond doing more than thirty or forty machines at a time. We initially tried to do that virtually and it just, it wouldn't work.

But that one physical appliance was enough to get us through and once we got the one K2000 physical appliance that was plenty to handle imaging whatever we needed. As far as the K1000, our original purchase was underpowered. We really didn't have the box we should have had for over three thousand nodes, but when it came time to upgrade that box, we got a box that was much more in tune to having over three thousand nodes on that system and it's been doing fantastic for almost three years now. We haven't had any problems.

Overall, the stability has been pretty good. We we were using the Quest KACE on the front end, and then we had a Samba share on the back end that we were using for storage for all of our imaging and for all of our software. There were some issues with how we were doing things on the Samba side versus how they were connecting that to the K box, so there was some issues, but it wasn't anything that was Quest KACE's problem and Quest KACE has done everything that could possibly do to help us work the bugs out. But ultimately it was mismanagement on our end of people not knowing what they were doing and how they were supposed to be administrating the box.

It was really just as simple as buying the licenses as we needed it. As far as man power goes when I first started there, there was four technicians doing roughly 3,300 machines.

They were always fantastic. We dealt mainly with one tech support representative, and he was always spot on. We had some issues early on that I guess they didn't anticipate, and we worked closely with Dell, when Dell owned it, to work out some bugs that were huge for Dell. And because we were early adapters, we were kind of like Beta testers for some things that they eventually got a chance to role out to everybody else.  At first, USB imaging didn't work and then we worked with tech support for a while to get that ironed out and once we got that taken care of, it all got rolled into a new update and then it worked. The tech support staff was just phenomenal.

When I first started at my office, everything was done through Novell. At that time, we didn't have the ease of pushing software and remoting into the devices as we did with Quest KACE.

We also used another solution that wasn't exactly secure - it was touted as a secure solution but there had been some issues. It had been hacked before. And we were starting to get into an area where we were having outside vendors ask us for access into our network, so that started to become a concern for us.

It was easy. The team of the company came in, and helped us set it up.

The initial implementation was through Dell. They were excellent.

If the professionals make a recommendation, consider it. Really, seriously, consider it, because there were some things we didn't do with Quest KACE that we should have, and it  really hurt us in the long run. Even going back as far as active directory, there was some things that we didn't do with active directory that we were told by Microsoft engineers that this is what you need to do with active directory. Six, seven years later, we're looking at a network of two hundred almost VLANs. So, implementation of KACE was fairly smooth for us. If we would have done things exactly the way they would have told us to, which would have included flattening the network, like the Microsoft engineer told us to do when we went to active directory, things would have been even more smooth. We wouldn't have problems with wake-on-LAN, we wouldn't have problems with our scripting, we wouldn't have had problems with our SAMBA share. It would have been so much easier down the road to listen to the professionals and do exactly what they suggested we do, but because we had people who thought they were smarter than the professionals, we had some pains with implementation.

Nothing against Microsoft, but everybody I talk to, who has ever dealt with Microsoft SCCM, has ever dealt with Quest KACE. And, in comparison, it's just more user friendly, easier to integrate and it's just such a more elegant solution. It may be more expensive, but you get what you pay for, you know?

We also looked at Spiceworks. A lot of people on our team liked it because it is a free product. They were still working on their whole footing, trying to get everything worked out with that. But with Quest KACE, t had so many other things to offer. You know, with the ability to include the K2000 and K3000, which interested us.

The only hiccups we had were some power issues, where the box was a little under-powered early on. But, as far as having instances of bugs, or anything like that, the box ran great, as long as we left everything alone.

We have several use cases for KACE and a lot of them are related to the helpdesk. For example, they provide assistance with modifying the helpdesk, client distribution, and maybe a tad bit in scripting on how to use it.

I've used the KACE tickets a lot.

This solution provides us with compliance management. We used it for security updates including Windows security, Dell, and other products. Another feature that we use is patch management. In fact, we patch other products all the time using KACE. I have Windows and Dell updates running bi-weekly, whereas other products are done weekly. Microsoft servers are an example of something that we regularly patch.

The combination of the features is important, although I'm just happy that it all works. It's fairly easy to use once you figure it out.

The system helps a lot when it comes to updating and configuring everything the way we need it to be in our environment. In particular, their support engineers are really good, although the system usually configures and updates mostly on its own. 

Price to using KACE, we were using emails. Now that we have a ticketing system, everything is monitored and everything is saved. For example, with the service desk portion, it's a lot easier to track because of the OSV files. They take up a lot of storage and as such, they get stored in archives. This means that it's hard to find those emails, so it's difficult to see what people said. Something we would look for is how we resolved an issue by following steps X, Y, and Z. This information is all available in the description of the ticket and by using KACE, we can find it easily. As far as the service desk operations go, this solution has been A one.

Using this solution saves us lots of time, especially when it comes to performing updates. We only have one on-premises server, and we have somebody that updates it, but prior to using KACE, there were lots of errors that would occur. For example, one update superseded another. Now, it is put on the automated run with a smart ticket and the server is always up to date. I estimate that we're saving at least 40 hours per month, based on the fact that we have 170 computers. It takes a long time to push all of the software updates to every one of them.

When we consider patching and software application updates, our productivity has increased by at least 80%. This has been major for us, especially with COVID and since people started working from home. It's been tougher to manage everybody but with KACE, it's made the job a lot easier. For example, the KACE agent looks at the client and it updates everything automatically.

The system gives us visibility with respect to whether a user is online, or the last time they were online. While online, it also gives us real-time status updates.

The only feature that we aren't using yet is asset management, and that is something that we are working on.

This solution is easy to use. None of it is very difficult, although I had to learn it from the ground up and it wasn't very easy when I first started with it. However, progressively, as I put in tickets and began using the service desk, the Quest help, and the technical support, they showed me how it works. Usually, after they showed me one time, I was able to understand what I needed to do. Eventually, it was really easy to use.

The inventory is really good, where it automatically updates catalogs. When I check on things, it's right there, and it even has zero-day patches. When you fine-tune it and set up the automation, it makes life much easier.

The patch management security is also A one.

It would be nice if the asset management capability was a little more intuitive.

The software asset management functionality is an area that needs to be improved. It could be more automated because when connections need to be made, such as when I connected Adobe and my malware remover, the process was pretty much manual.  For example, I have to tell it which and how many licenses we have, and I have to keep updating it. KACE has what they call Smart Labels and they are supposed to automatically detect things, but it seems that they don't detect anything. I put all of the information in, and it still won't do it. It makes you wonder why you're putting the information into the system in the first place.

I have not been able to connect to Active Directory, which is a ticket that I've had open for several months. It looks like the problem may be on our side. I've been working with the firewall team, which is a third-party vendor, and even their developers can't figure it out. Each vendor is pointing fingers at the other. I just want it to work.

I have been using Quest KACE Systems Management for approximately two years.

I like the stability a lot. It doesn't crash. We've had a few hiccups but it's definitely not worse than some of our vendors. The downtime is near 0%. Some of our vendors have a lot of downtime.

Scalability-wise, this product is great.

When we first implemented KACE, we had approximately 80 computers that we needed to install it on. We now have 170 computers.

We will continue to use this solution going forward. Every time we stage a computer, we make sure that we put KACE on it. Once we do that, we pretty much don't have to worry anymore. We're setting up more PCs and we're going to be hitting the 200 mark, probably at the end of the year. We have been hiring a lot of people and I expect it will continue.

There are three people who use KACE but I am the primary one. I'm the only person that makes changes and monitors the system regularly.

The technical support is pretty good but we still have cases pending. There is one case that we have had open for several months and I'm not the happiest about that, but for everything else, the assistance has been pretty spot on. It's hard to complain about the support.

Sometimes, I figure it out myself after opening a ticket but usually, they can get the job done. They are much more responsive than most vendors. I don't know if they have SLAs but if they do, then I would say that they're meeting them. They usually contact me either the day of, if it's early enough, or the next day, which is nice.

If I speak with any one of them, it doesn't matter. I've worked with multiple support engineers from KACE and they all seem to know what they're doing.

Usually, I have to contact them for the higher-level stuff. For example, I didn't know about how security certificates worked because I had never used one before.

The vendor has Premier support available, although we do not use it right now. We haven't looked into it yet but because we're growing and don't have enough IT people, Premier support might be ideal. For example, I have read that they help with VBS scripting, and I don't know it, so that would help me to learn it a little bit faster. Also, they save certain things for Premiere support. I had asked the service desk if I can change the category of a service ticket and they told me that I could, but it was a custom option. For that kind of thing, you need to have Premium support. I plan to call the vendor and get a quote for the service. That said, for everything that's not custom, they help a lot.

Overall, they're very proficient and they're very knowledgeable about the product.

We were using Datto RMM before, and KACE is much easier to use. I wasn't the most familiar with the old solution but with KACE, I can do things beyond monitoring. For example, I can do distributions or use security updates. With Datto, I basically used it to see what PC people were on.

Before I was hired, an IT company used to manage our infrastructure and they were the ones using Datto. We moved away from the IT company, which is why we switched.

We have not used any of the freeware products that are available or tried SCCM to achieve the same functionality.

It was definitely complex but that is because I'd never seen anything like it before. It wouldn't be a fair assessment to say that it was the most difficult thing, but it was a lot of information and I'd never used smart labels before. I was very confused at the beginning.

But, after I put in tickets, they did take the time to go back over it with me. After they showed me maybe once or twice, I understood what a smart label does. From that point on, it was very easy to create smart labels and automate the system.

It takes perhaps five minutes to install KACE on one computer. The longest part is pulling it down from the server. Once it's copied to the local machine, it only takes a minute or 90 seconds to install.

We completed the deployment in-house.

The pricing is great. It's billed annually and it's very reasonable.

My manager was already very familiar with this solution, which is why it was chosen. We didn't evaluate other options.

I have seen other monitoring tools that you use with a PC, where they are part of the assets. With this one, you have to run a custom script and you have to do a lot of custom stuff. When you do custom work, you have to pay more money, obviously. It means that there is an extra cost but other than that, it's pretty good.

KACE provides capabilities for mobile device management, although we don't use the feature. We also don't really use the monitoring system at this point.

My advice for anybody who is looking to implement KACE is that it's fairly easy to use and once you learn it, it's a very simple product. It's not simple in function, but the ease of use is there and you can very quickly learn what you need to do to get things done.

Also, if you know a little bit more about VBS, you get stuff done a lot quicker. 

Overall, it's a great product, I'm really happy with it, and I feel like it gets the job done.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

My company had bought some new machines. We used the tool to do some basic settings to ship every machine the same way and undertake the Windows deployment. We did the scripted installation. The tool helped us deploy custom software for specific departments. We also did Windows updates with the product. 

We like the tool's most features. It is a straightforward tool that is easy to use. 

We had issues with the tool's support. We are a Dutch firm and everything has to be in Dutch. We were not able to do the alerts. You were required to tweak them a lot to get them in the language that you preferred. The solution's support depended on the person that you got online. Sometimes, the response was fast and other times you needed to wait a long time. The support also depended on the levels of support that you had requested. 

I have been working with the solution for 10-15 years. 

I would rate the product's stability an eight out of ten. 

The tool is perfectly scalable. 

When we setup the product, a technical engineer from Dell supported us. I am not sure if there is the same level of support these days. 

The product is reasonably priced. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. I find the product very useful and helpful. The tool has everything like Mobile Device Management that is needed to service a company. The tool has communities where you can seek help. You can visit their support site for technical support. You can also avail support through settings. 

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

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.

Positive

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.