AWS Auto Scaling vs. Microsoft System Center

There are two elements to auto-scaling. The first, adding/removing servers when [the] load varies, is the easy part. This is what AWS Auto Scaling does. The second is orchestration. This making sure your read replica doesn't receive requests until it is operational or making sure that your new [webserver] has finished starting JBoss, updating its sources, and loading your application before it is registered with the load balancer[.]

Incentivized

We used a product before that was designed to prevent users making changes and saving files to the desktop computer. This required a renewal of the license. By using SCCM in our environment we were able to discontinue using that product because SCCM allows us to completely restore a machine back to the original configuration. We have taught our users to save their individual work on either a network drive or a cloud drive. By doing this, if we do a re-image of their machine they have lost no data, and it makes for a faster resolution. In some instances having a computer in our SCCM environment it can become cumbersome when creating new users for very specific purposes. It can be done by creating new organizational units and applying new policies but when in a pinch it can be frustrating. For the most part we have tried to make "new" purpose images and groups to at least accommodate a quick install.

Incentivized

• Smart scaling decisions
• Automatically maintain performance
• Pay per use

Incentivized

• Provides our users the ability to deploy and manage our own datacenter based on defined software with understandable solutions for storage, compute, networking and security.
• We are able to update at once all the computers from all departments without having to install the OS on every computer.
• It allows us to have everything in one place for database management and datacenter inspection as well.

Incentivized

• Auto scaling features are very easy to use it.
• can decrease numbers steps to configure the auto scaling functionality
• New GUI screen need to improve for auto scaling functionality

• Needs web based storefront for requesting new software
• Needs ability to manage the packaging work flow better
• Sometimes is slow to download and there is no indication the entire catalog is being loaded, resulting in confused users not being able to find common software in the available list.

Incentivized

It is not user-friendly for the most part. With IT infrastructure, sometimes it cannot handle excess requests. Every few months, you will need an upgrade in terms of server resources to keep up with incoming alerts and requests. This does not happen all of the time, but it does happen when there are too many requests.

Incentivized

If I had to dislike something about the system it would be how much it changes once you upgrade. This could be more of a problem of mine since I get used to one way and don't like it when it changes so much. I am enjoying the newest update, but it is a mess when you are actually going through the upgrades.

Incentivized

The hardware provided is decent and customizable. They have lots of different options for everything[.]

Incentivized

We previously used a mix of FOG and Clonezilla to image machines. The biggest issues with these products is that changing one piece of the image required you to rebuild the entire image itself. These pieces of software also did not allow you to manage applications and Windows Updates, causing IT to have to constantly touch machines after they were imaged and update or manage them with a much more hands on approach.

Incentivized

• Pay per use, great ROI.
• Saves cost across departments.
• Workload and pc.

Incentivized

• We have been able to automate our patch management, firmware and other security concerns.
• We have a standardized "image" ensuring our setup is consistent across the enterprise. This alone has saved us in time to support and time to understand how to use our desktops.

Incentivized