KACE Systems Deployment Appliance (SDA) vs. Red Hat Satellite

It is most effective in Windows PC environments and doing mass Windows deployments across a wired LAN. It would not be suitable for small office/school environments or for environments with limited PC usage.

Incentivized

Red Hat Satellite works amazingly with servers that need more control over their packages. For one or two servers that you're just doing "dnf update" Red Hat Satellite is way overkill.

Incentivized

• Windows PC deployments.
• Windows PC re-imaging.

Incentivized

• Patches
• License Management
• Dashboards / Visibility

• USMT had issues with successfully capturing user states.
• MAC support, stopped supporting newer versions of MAC OS. No APFS support.

Incentivized

• I woud love for it to provide the same functionality for non-RHEL OS's
• Containerized Installation
• Simplified workflow setup

Incentivized

When you're first getting into the platform, the GUI can be a little confusing. It takes a little while to get accustomed to where everything is, and what everything is used for. I highly recommend prior training / classes before diving into the platform. This will ensure a better transition into the platform, and more likely to use more features of it overall due to the new knowledge gained

The majority of the support reps I talk to on the phone are quick to respond and very helpful. They will take their time helping you with any case for the SDA and have any issues with it. They will help you build new boot environments or deployments if you get stuck or have a problem.

Incentivized

• Primarily saves us time for maintaining our computer labs.

Incentivized

• We have been able to automate the update process to not require after-hours monitoring.
• Centralizing updates has greatly reduced the overall time servers are down and processing their individual updates.
• We are able to bring our own RPM packages in and stage them in the same deployment model as official Red Hat packages.

Incentivized