What advice do you have for others considering Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager?

I rate Microsoft Configuration Manager a ten out of ten.

I would recommend it using simply and would rate it 8 out of 10.

This tool is helpful for Microsoft assets but it is important to have clear visibility before implementation. It can be a complete solution but a plan. I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

We are not on the latest version. However, we're getting to upgrade the product. You need to understand what type of data you need and what it can pull. That's part of the configuration that needs to be done at the outset. If you know what you want and you make sure the system can do it, and it's configured right, and you'll be happy. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I give the solution a nine out of ten. Maintenance for the solution is easy. I recommend the solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager seven out of 10. You need to have the right mindset to use it. The first question should always be: Can this be automated? From there, you'll see if the product will satisfy their automation requirements.

I give the solution a nine out of ten. Maintenance is required for some client requests because a few of our cases involve clients reporting issues with their applications. We need to maintain their laptops because they usually run into issues while running other applications. However, in the case of personal computers, there is no problem. We can maintain them with only 20% of the typical maintenance requirements. I would recommend that everyone try out the Endpoint Manager solution from Microsoft. It is a great product because it integrates well with Microsoft products, which most organizations use. This reduces the number of integration and troubleshooting problems. Even if Microsoft products are not used in an organization, I still recommend this product. Other solutions are available but there may be some integration and troubleshooting problems.

I give the solution a nine out of ten. The solution doesn't require any maintenance from our end because it is a cloud-based solution and Microsoft takes care of everything. The solution is easy to integrate with the durations and application, and administration is also very simple. When you go with the combination of licenses, the cost is also good, and reasonable.

The solution is very stable and robust with a longstanding reputation. It works well with Windows devices and offers good management for ICCM. The cloud-based platform is a good option for managing only Android or iOS devices. I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

MECM is a solution that needs a team that is well-experienced in implementation, administration, troubleshooting, and more, but the reward is worth the effort. My biggest piece of advice is that before you integrate it into your company, make sure you have the required skills. I would rate MECM an eight out of ten.

I give the solution a nine out of ten. I recommend the solution because it functions as advertised. The solution is user-friendly and easy to learn. The solution has a nice-looking interface, unlike others out there.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. The solution is the best there is in the market today. A feature that could be included in the next release is its ability to load faster during deployment.

My advice to others is to plan ahead and make sure to take into account everything that the solution can do because if you do not understand what the product can do, you will probably buy a lot of software to do what the solution is already doing. Understand all the features and how you will be able to use them. The next features are coming through Microsoft Intune. I rate Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager nine out of ten.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is a complete solution for what we need it for, and I would recommend it to others. I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

If you're new to the solution then it's worthwhile studying the documentation because it's not easy in terms of all the components that make it up such as SQL and so forth. I rate the solution nine out of 10.

I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others if you're an Azure-centric organization. If you have your workloads on Azure and are a Microsoft-based organization. For example, you have Microsoft servers, Microsoft endpoints, Azure workloads, BD VMs, Data Factory, and SQL. I would advise others to use online help forums instead of Microsoft documentation because they can tend to be complicated and lengthy. I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

You may need complementary products to handle the holes not envisioned by SCCM. For what it was designed to do, I would rate it a nine out of 10.

We're partners with Microsoft. For people looking into implementing Configuration Manager at this point, I would recommend it. They should also look at InTune, which is more of an endpoint deployment. For the servers, you can still look at what we have, however, just the way, how things are developing, I can see the industry and patch management moving away from on-prem management to more like making use of the cloud and use of our Microsoft for business in terms of managing the updates, ease of updates and things like that. What is happening now is a paradigm shift. I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. It's great for enterprises.

In the next release, we are moving to the cloud, which also fits the strategy of Microsoft. We would like that the features on the cloud side are very similar to what we have on the on-premise side. We are looking to move to the cloud with Intune, but Intune is not like SCCM in terms of the features. We prefer that they develop all the features on the cloud. I would recommend others to go for it if they are using any other solution to manage their Windows or Microsoft environment. It will make life easier. I would also recommend others to check the cloud solution before implementing the on-premise solution. They can see what can be done on the cloud. Cloud is not fully ready to replace the on-premise solution, but they can do some of the parts on the cloud and some of the parts on-premises. I would rate it a nine out of 10.

Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager is suitable for small businesses. If you have fewer offices and fewer users, then the efficacy of this product is very high. If the company doesn't have a system for a long time or doesn't have many employees or environmental issues, they can open Intune and have a cloud-based solution and get all the features together there. You can stage your content, and you can share where you have no connectivity. You can go ahead and do the whole deployment and a lot of things. Intune is still improving, but SCCM has a feature of all this deployment and all other things. So I would say that SCCM has a stronghold and is still relevant. It's an excellent product, but Intune will take it over in a few years. But not entirely because they will coexist. They are working in an environment simultaneously, hand in hand, but I think the market will move more toward Intune (if it's not moving already). I would advise potential users to take a structural approach. They should know the customer's requirements, the number of users, and the locations. They need to have the setup, create a cache, and then binary and secondary options for these deployments. But if you're using a cloud-based solution, you don't have too much worry about it because everything will come from the internet. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager an eight.

The solution is good for us because most of our users are using Microsoft-based products and the solution is compatible for anyone using Linux-based or AWS. I rate the solution nine out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Microsoft Endpoint Configuration Manager a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it. I would rate SCCM a seven out of ten.

We are just customers and end-users of SCCM. We have been using SCCM for the past decade, however, now, the company is supposed to go with Intune for model management. However, we have a new CPO or CSO double hatting with security as well. He's more inclined in Bigfix features, which offer more robust patch management as well as vulnerability scan. SWe dropped the plan to go with Intune and will go with Bigfix, moving us away from SCCM. Our CPO, CSO is mainly the driver for the change, not because it is on our roadmap or our partnership with the vendor or anybody else. In general, I would recommend the solution to other organizations and companies. We've been happy with it over the years. I'd rate it at a nine out of ten.

If you are implementing from new, go with Intune directly, don't use the on-premises version. With the transitioning state to the cloud versions, I would rate SCCM a seven out of ten. They have handled desktops very well but they haven't transitioned servers very well.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SCCM a nine.

I would not recommend using this solution. I didn't really like anything about it. In general, I am not a fan of Microsoft. I would rate SCCM a four out of ten.

We're just a customer and end-user. We use the latest version of the solution. I can't speak to the exact version number. I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's an incredible product. I would recommend other companies to go ahead with whatever the latest cloud option is on offer. That is due to the fact that there is no SCCM as a product now. They have already transformed it into Microsoft Endpoint Manager. If a company is heavy on Microsoft products, like Office 365, this is the right tool, however, if not, if they are not a Microsoft centric organization, then maybe they can explore VMware as well.

I would rate SCCM a nine out of ten.

Since I cannot think of anything in need of improvement concerning SCCM, I would rate it as a ten out of ten.

I would tell potential users that SCCM is a good solution if their focus is on the number of computers and laptops they have in the company. I used it for the first time, and it was good. But users should know what kind of databases they are using and if the integration has sufficient rights to access that data. On a scale from one to ten, I would give SCCM a seven.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using this solution. I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are currently looking for another solution to work in parallel to cover some of the gaps in functionality. I rate SCCM an eight out of ten.

I really like SCCM. I am constantly learning new things all the time. So far, it seems pretty straightforward. It's a good product designed for medium to large-sized environments that need to automate their deployments and set them in an organized manner. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

As I have not used any other product, I can't say that I would or wouldn't recommend SCCM. If there is anything better, I would like to know. It works, but the database fails almost every time. I would rate SCCM a seven out of ten.

We are Microsoft partners. I'm a consultant. This solution is being used by my client's companies. We are using the latest version of the solution, which is 2010. I would recommend SCCM based on the requirement of the customers. However, if they are looking for Unix and Linux support, which is no longer in SCCM, I'd recommend BigFix. That solution is better for Unix and Linux. Anybody who wants to implement SCCM should do some research online, depending upon what features they want. Once they see that SCCM will be able to manage, will be able to resolve their issues, they should choose it. However, they need to look for a partner, a Microsoft partner, that can take help from them for deployment purposes. I would rate the solution eight out of ten. If the product used less resources, I would rate it higher

I would recommend having someone to help with the deployment because the success of its deployment depends on the experience of the people who are deploying it. If you don't have enough experienced people in the internal IT department, it would be helpful to have a consultant from outside the organization to assist you. I would rate SCCM an eight out of ten.

We're just a customer and an end-user. We don't have a business relationship with SCCM. Overall, I would rate the solution at a seven out of ten. We've been mostly satisfied with it as a product.

We are still exploring this solution, and we haven't yet explored all the features. I would rate SCCM an eight out of ten. It just needs a better user interface and some kind of customizations because currently, they are very limited.

Compared to other tools I would recommend SCCM as a good solution for Windows systems only for managing your systems because it provides support for server operating system as well, rather than only for the client's operating systems. I would rate SCCM a nine out of ten but since their support for other operating systems other than Windows is limited, I rate them overall, a six out of ten.

We're just a customer. In the past, we used System Center version 2012, and after one year we upgraded to System Center 2016. Out of all the products in the market, the best solution is System Center, especially for Microsoft virtual machines and all services that are related to Microsoft Technologies. If you are evolving in the Microsoft environment, I prefer to use the System Center due to the fact that it includes different solutions like System Center Configuration Manager, System Center Operation Manager, System Center Virtual Backup. It's a full solution and provides different services. It has great integration with other Microsoft products. I would recommend the solution to an engineer or administrator. And first, a new user will have to study different best practices and have a good overview of the architect of System Center and the functionality of the different components. After that, they would have to go in through the details about the Linux machines. The biggest problems we had at the time of implementation was related to Linux virtual machines, not Microsoft virtual machines. With the licensing and the price, it's a tricky point that the engineers should consider when they need to set up a license Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten.