Automox

In my opinion, PDQ Deploy is better than yall and at a much better price point. We selected Automox last year because the network engineer at the time was [...] with powershell and liked what he saw. He promptly left after the contract was signed and before we integrated Automox into our environment.

Moving from on-prom patch management to to a cloud base automation tool

satellite is costly.
spacewalk is opensource and has limited fucntionality.

it is easier to use and manage

The cost was the biggest factor. SCSM was a great product but it offered way too many features we didn't need. Automox was affordable and offered just the right amount features to cover our needs without being too difficult to manage. We also didn't need the full suite from Microsoft to manage endpoints with AntiVirus and the other add ons they tout.

Automox has a cleaner and easier to navigate interface and was more intuitive to use.

It highlighted problematic systems and allows easier remediation of those devices

AutoMox is much easier to use and has a lot more capabilities

We have used Microsoft WSUS servers in the past; there is no comparison between it and Automox. Automox is so much easier to use and provides the ability to patch other operating systems and 3rd party apps.

Better 3rd party patching and reporting.

Special thing about Automox is that it has customer deploy packages for many remote end points where as other tools listed does not have that privileges. Other tools are not user interface friendly where as Automox user interface is very easy and customizable as well. Unique thing about Automox is that it has great dashboard but other tools has good reporting structure which is a bit lacking in this tool.

We stoppped using PDQ because it required our users to connect to the corporate VPN. It might take months for some remote users to receive a patch, and often we would have to schedule time with them one-on-one to ensure that it got done. With Automox, we don't have to do any of that - it just happens silently in the background.

Automox was at the top of the group - it was a light client, a SAAS offering and did not have some of the bells and whistles that the tools have but was not something that we would use. Also, the learning curve for the support staff was easy enough and we did not need SMEs that we would need for the other tools, something we were not ready add more staff to augment.

Transitioning from Kaseya VSA to Automox brings many benefits for organizations. Automox makes things easier for users with its user-friendly interface, making it simple to navigate and use. It excels at managing patches for operating systems and third-party software, keeping everything up to date and secure. It integrates smoothly with other tools, making your operations more efficient. By adopting Automox, you'll enjoy a smoother user experience, effortless patch management, improved visibility, customization options, easy deployment, and seamless integration, all leading to greater efficiency, heightened security, and effective management of your endpoints.

Automox is cloud based vs PATCH MANAGER Plus which requires on premise servers. We consistently had issues with PATCH MANAGER Plus working on remote computers even with appropriate firewall rules and configuration. PATCH MANAGER Plus had an awkward interface. Automox interface is much cleaner and easier to navigate; however, it is also more expensive.

Baramundi is much more complicated to setup and use, and requires Windows devices to be managed via AD Domains, and will not work if devices are NOT in the domain, such as Azure AD joined devices

After a trial period of both, we preferred Automox overall

What other Products do you have?

I've used a number of other patching products at previous employers. Automox, while it does not have all the bells and whistles of SCCM, Tanium, or BigFix such as software self service or automated deployment through network scanning, software catalogs, or warranty check integrations; it is far easier to get running and keep running. It requires no servers to store the management, patches, or software catalogs. While SCCM and Tanium take weeks to months to get fully configured its takes hours or days to have Automox running. The big 3 often have month long crash courses after onboarding. Automox takes a matter of an hour or two to become accustomed to all its menus and how to handle policies. Automox and Action1 are probably a bit closer in their out of the box capabilities and ease to deploy. Automox offers more granular control over patches, supports much more complex scripting and automation via scheduling. Automox also supports Windows, Mac, and Linux vs Action1s Windows only approach. When it came down to time to configure, money, device support, and ease of use Automox came out on top.

I would never go back.

Nicer user interface and less convoluted

Couldn't depend on this solution to patch our devices. It was integrated with an ITSM and frankly it was useless.

Patching management at cost effective. I like the ease of onboarding, reporting, ease of use and integration with our vulnerability management apps. I like how proactive the support team is with regular updates. It's easy to roll out massive updates and choose when the system will restart. Easy to set up notifications through the intuitive UI.

The ability to do 3rd party patching - multiple OS' along with the ability to create an organization platform with managed tiers/silos makes using Automox within a larger org that has specific division heads much easier to use. I can control my division tech while leveraging bulk cost savings at different divisions.

Single function product
Best cost per seat
Easy to deploy and use

Automox is a better choice than NinjaOne due to the fact that it supports more types of devices.