Ivanti Endpoint Manager increases user and IT productivity by helping IT administrators gather detailed device data, automate software and OS deployments, and quickly fix user issues.
N/A
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Desktop Central from ManageEngine is a client desktop management with patching, remote control, and configuration.
N/A
Pricing
Ivanti Endpoint Manager
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Ivanti Endpoint Manager
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
EPM is licensed per device (endpoint) in a subscription model. Each license allows for managing one endpoint.
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Ivanti Endpoint Manager
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Considered Both Products
Ivanti Endpoint Manager
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Ivanti Endpoint Manager
Ivanti was the best option at that time, as we were a completely on-premises company, and compared to the others, Ivanti was the only one covering all Operational Systems.
Ivanti Endpoint Manager was good at Automated Patch Management and has a efficient Software Distribution methodologies. It is also has powerful Remote Control for Support and good inventory management
Ivanti's all-in-one concept is easier to standup, manage, and use than SCCM. Although SCCM requires Teamviewer for remote assistance, it is more reliable than Ivanti Remote Assistance. That being said, Ivanti provides a more robust solution that gives much greater granularity …
There is no silver bullet or perfect endpoint management tool but, after evaluating 17 different products for our organization, I found that Ivanti checked the majority of the boxes we needed. Ivanti is well-positioned in the market and constantly expands its portfolio.
Better in most all categories. On-prem was not an issue for my organization. MS SCCM was lacking features. Airwatch required increasing tiers of service in order to match [Ivanti Unified Endpoint Manager (formerly LANDESK Management Suite)] features, and lacked the robust …
ManageEngine had lots of the whizbangs but couldn't tie it all in together. It was a bit clunky and you still would need other products to get the job done. All-in-all it didn't seem like a full solution that would meet our needs.
Ivanti Endpoint Manager runs in the kernel so it is more robust than Workspace Control. It is also better at capturing settings. However, Workspace Control is much easier to administer and roll out. There is one interface where you can make all settings. We really miss that …
I think that the Ivanti EPM method of collecting inventory data is much more useful that the other products. The way that queries and scopes can be generated and then used across the board in all of the features makes for very dynamic use cases.
We are currently looking and re-evaluating EPM against these competitive systems. Because our evaluation is starting again, I will come back to this question.
I think Ivanti UEM is the best product out there as everything is laid out and you can accomplish anything you need to do. You do not need to re-invent the wheel or build tasks from the ground up. You just need to implement a good strategy and plan for what you wish to …
LANDESK is more modern and has a better UI for our HD techs. It is also vastly more expandable than Remedy was when we left it (approx. two years ago). It's not really a comparison of CRM to CRM though, and if it were I'd say LANDESK is 10-25% better, but the additional …
It's a solid contender in the endpoint management scene with so many competing products that may excel with certain features you are sure to find with IEM a solid tool that covers all bases.
IEM beats our old solution due to widest solution set. It does more, and does it more successfully and more thoroughly, that any other solution out there.
We have tried SCCM it was great but was not working so much. Well then we have used the central desktop from the Zoho corporation. Finally we got LANDESK Ivanti Endpoint Manager which has done all the things [in a] the single platform. [Zoho] is new system like Intune and …
Both solutions will effectively manage Microsoft patches to devices, but Ivanti goes the extra step. With Ivanti, we can manage third party patches, where SCCM would require a third party solution (like Ivanti, who a lot of SCCM customers use for third party). Ivanti also …
SCCM integrates really well within Windows, but IEM does exceptionally well with the Big 3 (Windows, MacOS, Linux). Anything you can do in one, you can do in the other.
We selected Endpoint Central because we couldn't manage our patching with SCCM anymore; we noticed it was inconsistent and not working properly. Also, it wouldn't work out-of-network, which is an important factor for us. These products all helped us improve the quality of our …
Endpoint Central has a lot more functionality than PDQ. We've used PDQ for years, but we no longer see the cost as worth it since Endpoint Central handles inventory and software deployment just as well. Having everything in a single interface is also useful.
KACE SMA was beginning to feel quite dated and complicated. Some things started requiring advanced SQL queries to get sorted, and many of our old scripts stopped working because the SQL schema changed over the years. So far in ManageEngine Endpoint Central, I have not needed to …
The other applications perform limited activities such as vulnerability scanning management, but not mitigation in the case of Nessus; Intune controls device access and key management, but does not patch, does not provide remote support, and does not manage access to USB and …
For me, Endpoint Central belongs to the big three (WS1, Intune, Endpoint Central), so it's better in its own third-party app repo, Vulnerabilities report, Script deployment, OS Management, and Communication between the server and the endpoint. Is no worse than WS1 in Endpoint …
We were using Microsoft WSUS and SCCM but they lack reporting depth that ManageEngine Endpoint Central has and also they lack automation features. ManageEngine Endpoint Central complexity is mush less than SCCM and WSUS.
I was not a part of the initial selection process, but I understand the issue was related to cost per endpoint. As a user of the other solutions I would say that the other solutions do have other strengths that ManageEngine is missing. The remote access tools are superior but …
ManageEngine Endpoint Central is an on-premise
unified system. All modules are integrated into one central interface and detailed
reporting capability. It’s possible to manage all devices regardless of their OS
ManageEngine Endpoint Central is better than these products because of user experience and easy functionality. When I evaluated other products, I faced difficulty in exploring their features and there were too many things to do before a simple deployment unlike ManageEngine …
We evaluated multiple endpoint management solutions before selecting ManageEngine Endpoint Central, and the main reason for choosing it was its strong patch management capabilities combined with centralized endpoint control at a competitive cost. Compared to other solutions, …
Manage Engine is in a different league if I have to compare. Also, I am very secure, as most of what we do is very Security-oriented. It's not just a ticketing and remote support system; it's a Global Systems Monitoring, Updating, Securing, and Remote Support System that makes …
Remote Access Plus Cloud is a native cloud solution, lightweight agent and very competively priced. It supports both entra-joined and cloud-joined devices and has a comprehensive set of basic featues that I need. Though spotty, the system manager is fantastic, when it works and …
We replaced LANDESK with Endpoint Central. When comparing the two, Endpoint Central is the clear winner in every single category you can think of. LANDESK was incredibly tedious to use, and it was far less powerful than Endpoint Central. We are very happy with the wide array of …
You need to push O365 or some product out to your institution. If you need to build out a reboot before and after and maybe something else, [Ivanti Unified Endpoint Manager (formerly LANDESK Management Suite)] can easily do that for you. It then can also use a query to determine who needs that product in your environment and then continue using that query to watch for the machines you targeted to show up once your push succeeded. If you need to, you can use the task scheduler and schedule your software distribution for a specific not in normal business hours or on a weekend.
I think most scenarios are well-suited to Endpoint Central. Keep third-party applications upgraded, OS Deployment, Report Endpoint with vulnerabilities, check compliance with CIS, but it is much more, internal app deployment, much more compliance policy, Integration with Office 365 Conditional Access, Endpoint Configuration, Works fine with custom script even when you don't know any scripts, there are plenty of templates.
Software distribution - the ability to sit and provide software when a machine calls home works phenomenally well. You may also target based on certain conditions, ranging from LDAP queries down to hardware revisions of individual components.
Operating system provisioning - the range of choice in sequential execution is second to none. We migrated from MDT to Ivanti's providing with relative ease.
Patching and compliance - you're able to get extremely granular, and the rollout project templates make rolling it a particular patch from QA to Production an automated breeze
We set alerts when a devices gets low on disk space. That is automatic and creates a ticket in ME SDP. We are then able to Add space to a VM Desktop, and then go thru ManageEngine Endpoint Central to extend the drives so the entire process can be done without interruption to the end user.
Using the patch scans we can easily see what patches have been installed for all manufacturers not just Microsoft, without having to physically go to the device. It also allows us to choose which patches we want to push out and automate the process so we can be hands off, freeing up out time for other things.
Remote access to devices. This allows us to remotely make changes, not just via remote control but also make registry changes and clean up space without going to the device and without interruption to the end user.
Alerts. We have set up to get email alerts when new hardware is plugged into any computers. This lets us know if someone is bringing in un-authorized equipment (thumb drives, hubs, etc) to better manage what is/is not on our network.
Mac support - While it's the best I've seen with cross platform support, that doesn't mean they don't have a long way to go to catch up with the functionality of other tools that focus on one specific platform.
Product coherence - Their core product, the management suite, is great but with every new acquisition the company makes, it seems like there's another product that gets shoehorned into the picture. Making all those disparate pieces work smoothly together is something they're still working on.
Documentation - They come out with a lot of great features but some are so complicated I couldn't begin to understand the various facets of it all. I realize the days of published manual are long gone but even a PDF covering the major components in detail would be better than having to bump around in the dark until you have to call support for help.
Software Licensing Management - Every major release seems to completely rewrite this tool but they keep seeming to miss the mark. Lately it's a Microsoft Silverlight program that's very slow and has way too much data to be useful.
Web Console - The web console is all but unusable. The only way to really work on administration is to use the 32bit console which is great if you're running Windows but a fully featured web console would be much preferred.
As Microsoft evolves Intune, SCCM, MECM and combines their features into the MS EULA, Ivanti seems to be going the opposite where they are stripping out core products in favor of an EULA + A la cart pricing model that simply is more expensive than Microsoft's pricing. A few years ago, the gap was large enough to justify the extra cost of Ivanti, today the gap has closed significantly enough that the value add just isn't there for us.
It has been a staple tool for maintaining the environment and as we grow it will be needed more. While trying to configure the system to allow us to access and support systems that are in locations outside of the primary network EndPoint Central will be crucial in facilitating that needed connection.
Items are logically laid out and most are easy to find. The more advanced stuff can be trickier, but it is still not hard to find. There are a lot of options though, so remembering where some settings are, especially if you do not alter them often, can take a minute, but you will get to them fairly qiickly.
The product is really easy to set up and use. The web interface is relatively easy to use depending on the feature you are trying to use. The search features for inventory for both software and hardware are really good. You might get lost trying to navigate the file managers for endpoints because while the web interface is extremely easy to use, the feature set is very limited
TRM\TAM support has been generally very good. Getting reported bug fixes, design changes, UX problems resolved has been a pain. It is often difficult to get problems escalated beyond the TRM\TAM level. Support is fantastic when you can get it, getting it can often require more work than it should, and that is probably our biggest issue.
The immediate chat support is great and very helpful. However, if you need escalated support or have a deeper need that the chat tool can't help with, you will experience significant wait times and slow responses. The time zone difference becomes painful to the point of often just giving up.
It seems that the services offered with the purchase change from what is covered to what is an additional cost. Somethings I thought we had ended up requiring an additional purchase if we wanted to continue using the feature.
Better in most all categories. On-prem was not an issue for my organization. MS SCCM was lacking features. Airwatch required increasing tiers of service in order to match [Ivanti Unified Endpoint Manager (formerly LANDESK Management Suite)] features, and lacked the robust inventory data we needed. Meraki was very simple to use, but did not meet our needs. I would say that most Airwatch customers aren't using all the features they are paying for, and could save lots of money by using Meraki instead.
We selected Endpoint Central because we couldn't manage our patching with SCCM anymore; we noticed it was inconsistent and not working properly. Also, it wouldn't work out-of-network, which is an important factor for us. These products all helped us improve the quality of our work and efficiency.
Centralized IT - all in one solution that is better in some areas than traditional niche software applications. You'll probably still spend the same amount of time with users on the HD line, but you'll be able to reduce the amount of time it takes for auxiliary Help Desk tasks (ticketing, reporting, background deployment, etc.)
Cost - This is a negative of course ;) But at some point you can save some money if you ditch SCCM or your other CRM