Heimdal Patch and Asset Management vs. ManageEngine Endpoint Central

Heimdal Patch and Asset Management is amazing at what it does - keeping all servers and endpoints patched and up to date. It removes the hassle out of manually checking software on each server and endpoint, and frees up the IT team's time to only have to interact with software that won't update automatically.

Incentivized

Patch management is a HUGE time saver. Simply being able to push patches out to devices without having to physically go around to each one save a ton of time. Inventory tracking has also helped us better manage equipment. We are all human and make mistakes, and this helps to eliminate or catch many of those mistakes. With ManageEngine Endpoint Central scans showing us who is using the device and what else is plugged into it, saves us from having to search for devices when they are being refreshed.

Incentivized

• All updates are delivered across all devices, whether domained or not.
• Ability to add applications to patching regime is excellent.
• Single pain of glass portal for all modules.
• If needed (rarely), support has been first class.

Incentivized

• It helps to facilitate the administration of a network of workstations and servers.
• The deployment of applications and updates is very easy to implement, and greatly facilitates keeping workstations and servers up to date.
• The commissioning of the solution is very simple, and with the help of the external gateway, it allows for the supervision of all equipment, as long as they have internet access.
• We can manage multiple mobile fleets, with user smartphones on one side and industrial smartphones with specific missions on the other. The possibility of applying a kiosk mode is not negligible.

Incentivized

• Interface could be more user friendly but when you know how it works its allright
• Easier way to quickly see what updates are installed on what machines

Incentivized

• Better remote access, sometimes manage engine will not be running in services and I can't remote in.
• Pop-up when I'm trying to work, no I don't want to learn about a new feature while trying to solve an emergency.
• Hard to onboard a computer if it doesn't automatically go.

Given these factors, organizations would individually assess their experience with Endpoint Central to determine its renewal likelihood. If you're considering renewal, it might be helpful to gather feedback from users within your organization, review performance metrics, and assess how well Endpoint Central aligns with your current and future endpoint management needs.

Incentivized

The application itself is great. However, I have little insight to what the patches are doing. Being able to see patch download progress, not just the status, would be great. The user interface could also use an overhaul. The countless menus, sometimes containing similar if not duplicate tabs can be frustrating to navigate.

Incentivized

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.

We assessed both ManageEngine and Qualys (specifically their patch management solution) against Heimdal Patch and Asset Management. Qualys was an outlier in terms of cost and felt complex for setup at the time (I believe this has now improved) when compared to both alternate solutions. When considering our patch solution we also wanted a product that could integrate additional features (Spam filtering, endpoint protection, remote desktop support) under "a pane of glass". Heimdal Patch and Asset Management seemed to cover this off within the best interface at a competitive price for each additional solution.

Incentivized

Kaseya's system of handling patch management was not as intuitive as Endpoint Central, however in some respects it was easier to set up. Kaseya VSA and ConnectWise are also more geared towards managed service providers that handle multiple organizations versus a single company's IT department, which Endpoint Central seems more designed for. Intune, while helpful for machine management, does not have the level of overall endpoint management and inventory management and is better used alongside another endpoint management tool

Incentivized

• More Support necessary than without automated patching
• ROI is hard to determine as there was no 3rd party exploit in the time we have used Heimdal Patch and Asset Management

Incentivized

• We have been able resolve and complete any requests which include things like software deployment or issues that include troubleshooting, much faster and more efficiently. This has had a sharp decrease in our response times and also time it takes to complete these requests or incidents.
• The mobile device management features have allowed us to be able to have a much tighter grip on security. This means we have dramtically decreased our device vulnerabilities and risk of data breaches. This has saved us lots of time and money.
• The remote features that are available have helped a lot with user's being able to work remotely and allow our organisation to sustain hybrid work. It means user's can still be as productive and IT support is as efficient no matter where the user is working.