Autotask PSA

ServiceNow was faster to use to create tickets in a fast-paced call center style helpdesk. I preferred it to Autotask, but from a business perspective, I felt that Autotask covers a lot more ground than ServiceNow. My Experience with Solar Winds was minimal although it was a good professional product. I have only heard of SolarWinds in the press recently and they always seem to get hacked. ConnectWise was a great all-in-one product, from ticketing through to building quotes it had everything but felt a little clunky.

Both are very good, but Datto has better customer care in my opinion.

Datto Autotask is much more complex than Atera's ticketing platform but is much more customizable.

Datto Autotask PSA is probably the best all-in-one platform for MSPs. It's targeted and designed specifically for MSPs, whilst most service desk software/PSA is often just general service desk software.

I haven't used anything else.

Autotask is more robust than simple ticketing systems. It provides better billing ability that many ticketing systems and works well with existing clients. The invoicing options provided are beneficial to the business and streamline the process. The ticketing system provides documentation needed to service clients today and tomorrow. Autotask is on the right path.

The portion of Autotask that we've used other companies for prior to using Autotask is the Endpoint Management. The Autotask Endpoint Management (AEM) portal integrates perfectly with their PSA/CRM tools. It's alerting features are much better than the above software as there aren't a bunch of superfluous and unneeded alerts. Instead, it only alerts for things that you specify that you want.

Alerts aside, for the PSA/CRM, I don't have much to compare it to as Autotask was the first PSA we tried. It's hard to imagine a PSA having more features or doing a better job than Autotask.

Everything else either has multiple modules or you need separate suites to do everything you want.

It has been many years since we compared Autotask to the competition. We made the decision early on because of the overall solution that Autotask provides. It suits our needs well and we have not had a need to change since.

Cost was a factor. Our small company size meant less licenses to pay for each month for a web based product that our clients could easily use.

Its definitely has a better layout. Easier to customize. Easier search.

ConnectWise would be a close second however the overall functionality hasn't been great in the past, I've learned they've implemented a more robust web interface however the client was not stable. Autotask is easy to manage from service requests, reporting and time management.

I've used OTRS and Autotask gives a better overall experience as it isn't just simply a ticketing system it gives greater breadth over what you can accomplish. It allows for better interdepartmental communication rather than just a place for end users and clients to dump more information for trouble tickets. OTRS just doesn't have the same feature set.

Autotask stacks up fairly well against software like Kaseya, ConnectWise, and Tigerpaw. They all have their own strengths and weaknesses, however I feel that ConnectWise and Autotask have improved the most as of the last 10 years. The reason we chose Autotask is because it provided a much more robust feature set than ConnectWise for our specific business model. AutoTask was also more affortable and willing to work with us on cost much more.

Except for multi-tenancy and permissioning for external users, Autotask beats BMC Remedy in every category for an ITSM Incident/Request Management suite. From allowing legitimate multi-tasking to the streamlined and more-straightforward user experience, Autotask takes the focus off of the tool and on to the job itself. The need for substantially less support staff for Autotask administration is a secondary—but meaningful—advantage as well.