As an organization, we are resellers, we provide services to our clients, and we work on various government and manufacturing projects.
We provide consultancy, as well as our services for both Jamf Pro and Apple products.
We also offer assistance if they encounter any problems with the integration of Apple products.
When I first started using this product, there were a couple of features that still excite me because there was no scope to address those issues. And these features completely eliminate some of our previous issues.
I am most excited about a feature that is called User-Initialed Enrollment.
I also like the Composer feature, which is a unique feature.
Snapshot is one of the tools that allows any package, container, or package creator to find a way to work with various applications.
I really liked the Self Service applications as well. It is very convenient and useful.
The response time for support could be significantly improved.
I have some customers who are struggling to get a response.
The amount of time required for remediation is also a challenge. If the problem is identified on the first call, it should be tagged and resolved within the tag. This is something we have been dealing with, as well as a problem that some of our clients have encountered.
The cost could be lower.
I've been working with Jamf Pro for five years. I received my Jamf certification in 2017 and have been using it ever since.
Jamf Pro has been stable.
Jamf Pro is a product that can be scaled. Scalability is something that must and should exist, and I always believe in possibilities.
At the moment, the way the product is designed for managing Apple devices meets my needs.
When I need to scale it in the future, I know it's a possibility.
Support is something I believe could have been improved.
They offer one of the best cloud services available.
However, the response time and remediation could have been significantly improved.
Prior to Jamf Pro, I worked with three different products: SOTI, MaaS360, and VMware Workspace ONE.
The initial setup is quite simple. It is not at all complicated.
It is extremely simple for any user from an endpoint and an administrator's perspective.
It would be beneficial if it could be reduced slightly.
The price for these products is designed in such a way that I believe it is a little on the high side.
They are really evolving, and there have been a lot of improvements since 2017. I like the changes that have been made.
It is now designed in such a way that it can serve the needs of any organization. I have not encountered any issues where I felt it could have been significantly improved, and a specific feature could have greatly aided in addressing issues. So far, everything is running smoothly.
It is recommended for any of our organizations. Jamf Pro is superior to MDM on an Apple platform. If you put Jamf into context and you only want to manage Apple, I believe this is one of the best options.
It can be argued that the fact that it only supports Apple is either an advantage or a disadvantage.
Jamf is your go-to solution for managing your Apple Suite. You should investigate and deploy this product.
I would rate Jamf Pro a nine out of ten.
Our company is an integrator for Avalanche and we have clients who are using barcode scanners, thermal printers, etc., in the context of warehousing and logistics. We implement Avalanche for these clients to manage their Windows CE devices. The implementations are installed on the client's premises, using the client's own servers.
For example, we have one client who uses Ivanti's Speakeasy solution, and when the solution needs an upgrade we can use Avalanche to push updated packages to all the devices in production at one time.
Ivanti Avalanche has reduced the time needed to perform updates on all the devices across our clients' organizations. It's a great time-saver for the client.
The most useful feature of Avalanche is remote control — especially the ability to remotely install packages to many devices all at once. When the client has, for example, 100 devices needing updates, it would take far too long to update each device individually. But with Avalanche, we just connect to all the devices through the PC and send the updates out with one click.
Because our clients are all very satisfied with Ivanti from their side, there is little I can say about room for improvement. However, I think that to stay competitive with other solutions offering a similiar solution, Ivanti could look into making their products more affordable.
Personally, I want to see Avalanche make more approaches available for Android devices, in terms of managing devices and sending packages remotely.
I have been using Ivanti Avalanche for about two years now.
Avalanche is really stable. It's very good in this respect.
The scalability of Avalanche is very good because it's not a solution that consumes a lot of resources from a machine. It can be scaled quite easily.
Avalanche's technical support is very good. I receive all the help I need when I request it.
The setup was straightforward. I got a lot of support from a technician at Ivanti and everything works great. I have nothing to complain about.
As the integrator, it takes us about two or three days to get everything implemented. The initial installation and overall implementation are quite quick, not least because of the help I receive from Ivanti. It's a very pleasant process, in fact.
Other than the standard licensing fee, there aren't any additional or hidden costs, although I believe Avalanche could be made more affordable in general.
We have evaluated other options like SOTI, but for devices with Windows CE there aren't that many solutions available.
When comparing Avalanche to similar solutions, but for Android devices, Avalanche is much easier to use. This is mainly because a remote management solution for Android has to take into account a number of different factors such as the widely differing platforms and versions of Android itself. So a solution for managing Android is quite different to one that manages Windows CE devices. Currently, it's a lot easier to manage Windows CE devices with Avalanche rather than managing Android devices with another solution.
Avalanche is a stable, easy-to-use solution and we definitely plan to continue using it.
I would rate Avalanche a nine out of ten.
My company requires control over the deployment process of new computers, and we have set up some profiles for specific applications to configure the access policies and define permissions for certain objects or documents. That's the most common use case.
It's not working perfectly, but Microsoft's Autopilot offers great visibility into automated deployment solutions.
The reports aren't complete, and it's not easy to build custom reports. For example, Windows Autopilot isn't working well in cases where the computers don't have a good internet connection. Then the option is not good enough. Microsoft could add an integration for managing Intel vPro chipsets. That would be nice.
I started working with Intune three years ago.
I wasn't involved in some of the biggest deployments, but I think the solution is capable of handling various complex scenarios and architectures. We'll probably increase usage, but we don't have any plans in the near future.
Microsoft support is very good.
I previously used a different management solution called SOTI MobiControl, but I didn't switch because Microsoft Intune was better. I just changed companies.
Implementing Microsoft Intune is easy. Total deployment takes about one to two weeks. You access the portal, buy the subscription, and configure everything. We have three administrators managing the solution.
I'm researching VMware Workspace ONE, a new VM solution. I think it's interesting, but I don't have enough experience to give specific feedback about that tool.
I rate Microsoft Intune nine out of 10. I think my company needs to define the use cases for each user type and organization type. For example, we have to consider if the client has policies configured with Active Directory and assess to identify which policies are required in the new management solution then configure only the settings that they require.
We have many use cases in our customer's environment and use this solution to manage applications on devices. We have clients with Android devices, Apple devices with macOS, and Rugged devices with Windows CE.
The location and remote management services are the most valuable.
The location service could improve and more integration with other devices, such as Android enterprise and Apple devices.
We are having some issues with JavaScript or XML, and there is not any information provided for resolving it.
I have been using this solution for approximately four years.
The stability is good. However, there is some downtime.
The solution scalability is very good.
We have clients mostly in medium to large-scale enterprises. In some of our large customers, they have approximately 1,300 devices using the soltuion.
We have not had good experiences with technical support. We have many tickets remaining that are unresolved. The agents could improve by having better knowledge and faster response time.
There could be more troubleshooting information provided because sometimes we do not know how to resolve a problem or issue.
The on-premises version of the solution installation is complex.
We do the implementation of the solution and the time depends on the client's environment. It could take up to two weeks to implement but it depends a lot on the client's infrastructure.
We have a team of two engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.
Our clients have evaluated Soti. Mainly to resolve issues and problems with some devices that are using JavaScript environments.
I rate VMware Workspace ONE a nine out of ten.
