We just started playing with Mojo. It integrates with Google Enterprise so that's a plus. We're looking forward to giving this one a try as we've played with multiple Help Desk packages and I feel like Mojo might be the one. BMC Track-it! has a far better interface, in my …
Track-It!'s inventory control costs a lot more than LANSweeper. We're happy with the cost and features of LANSweeper compared to Track-It! We do use Track-It! for our ticketing system now. It is robust, full-featured, and blows LANSweeper out of the water. But for …
For the price Lansweeper easily moved to the top of our list. It is extremely easy to use and manage. The amount of detail it gathers on each asset automatically was amazing. Manually adding an asset is very simple as well. The fact that it will detect peripherals on machines …
Track-It! is great for a small-to-medium sized enterprise that has a fairly small IT department but needs far more control of tickets than just email and spreadsheets. It scales well enough as IT departments grow, adding techs is simple enough, as is changing the workflow. A large company would probably be better off with a different solution. The lack of easy customization, and the shortcomings it has in workflow templates (which would be a nightmare for project management) means it won't scale up that far.
Lansweeper I believe is well suited for any environment - its low cost and small footprint make it an easy addition to any organization, big or small, that is looking for an asset inventory solution that can either replace or supplement existing asset management systems. It may not be well suited for situations where a lot of customization is necessary, such as pulling in custom fields or details from equipment that don't reside in a registry.
Inventory - LANSweeper scans the network for devices - anything with an SNMP trap or using AD or local credentials. We can get an in-depth look at devices.
Reporting - LANSweeper can generate just about any report you can imagine. We can check RAM in groups and determine where upgrades are needed. We can find local printers (which aren't allowed on our network) and address that issue with the user. We can check CPU type to help determine end of life without our network.
Printers - It's nice to have a quick look at printer statuses. Toner levels, out of paper, and service errors are all reported via LANSweeper.
Can only scan what it sees. Doesn't show every item on the machine. Patches are also absent.
Software Recognition is OK with Microsoft. It is dire within our network of multiple products. Recognition is at about 35% with constant manual work needed to baseline for each manufacturer in each network
Datacenter compliance is a manual project. We used Excel extensively.
License optimization is limited to installations v surplus licenses. We need to know who's using what and how.
We have rarely needed to use Support for BMC Track-It!, but in the times that we did need to use it, they were excellent. The biggest issue is that after not paying for support for about three years, now that we NEED support, it is too expensive for us to receive. This is due to the way their support is billed. So long as you never drop support, then you should be fine.
Lots of info online there are tons of SQL Reports you can copy from the web as Lansweeper and users post many of them. They also send out alerts that pop up on Lansweeper, letting you know of an update that you need for certain software and provide an SQL report so you can scan your system to see what PCs need this update.
BMC Track-It! is much more bare bones compared to ServiceNow products, and if your department has the money, ServiceNow is a much better option. Not only is the Knowledge Base much easier to create and publish articles, but the asset management in BMC Track-It! is practically useless. BMC Track-It! is more cost effective, and with a small amount of technicians there's likely no reason to need a bigger solution, but it leaves a lot wanting.
Microsoft System Center needs to install agents on all IT asset for discovery and sometimes the agents can easily get corrupted. Lansweeper is a SaaS solution and it's easier to deploy to all IT asset that are connected to the network. This save us a lot of deployment time without the need to engage vendor for professional service.
The biggest positive impact it had on ROI was that the software itself didn't require any expensive ongoing maintenance contracts since it was installed and managed by our organization.
The negative aspect of this is if there was a major problem with the software, then it would require contacting the vendor, at which point it could become expensive for a service call.
It had a positive impact on solutions expense cause several teams we're using different solutions with different costs that used several servers and DB resources. Now, we've been able to simply that a lot with Lansweeper.
With my previous point, people had to train and learn about each of their solutions. Now we can put a team in charge and so the other teams can focus on other tasks.
Last year Lansweeper changed their licencing prices a lot so it slashed our budget.
