Desktop Central from ManageEngine is a client desktop management with patching, remote control, and configuration.
$795
per year per user
Ansible
Score 9.2 out of 10
N/A
The Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform (acquired by Red Hat in 2015) is a foundation for building and operating automation across an organization. The platform includes tools needed to implement enterprise-wide automation, and can automate resource provisioning, and IT environments and configuration of systems and devices. It can be used in a CI/CD process to provision the target environment and to then deploy the application on it.
$5,000
per year
Pricing
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
Basic Tower
5,000
per year
Enterprise Tower
10,000
per year
Premium Tower
14,000
per year
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Ansible
Free Trial
Yes
No
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Features
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform
Configuration Management
Comparison of Configuration Management features of Product A and Product B
Compared to other endpoint management tools that I have experience with, the patch management and the system health statistics functions work much better and are easier to navigate. The endpoint control functions are nowhere near as good as what I've used with Kaseya's VSA application - with that you could remote control a machine via a remote desktop type interface, or you could connect to the command line or PowerShell and it functioned as if you were directly connected to the machine - command history, tab completion, etc.. "just worked" and if the endpoint disconnected, you didn't lose anything that was going in the window when it reconnected (Exception being if the machine rebooted), grouping systems by department or building was also easier, as was moving systems between groups
For automating the configuration of a multi-node, multi-domain (Storage, VM, Container) cluster, Ansible is still the best choice; however, it is not an easy task to achieve. Creating the infrastructure layer, i.e., creating network nodes, VMs, and K8s clusters, still can't be achieved via Ansible. Additionally, error handling remains complex to resolve.
We set alerts when a devices gets low on disk space. That is automatic and creates a ticket in ME SDP. We are then able to Add space to a VM Desktop, and then go thru ManageEngine Endpoint Central to extend the drives so the entire process can be done without interruption to the end user.
Using the patch scans we can easily see what patches have been installed for all manufacturers not just Microsoft, without having to physically go to the device. It also allows us to choose which patches we want to push out and automate the process so we can be hands off, freeing up out time for other things.
Remote access to devices. This allows us to remotely make changes, not just via remote control but also make registry changes and clean up space without going to the device and without interruption to the end user.
Alerts. We have set up to get email alerts when new hardware is plugged into any computers. This lets us know if someone is bringing in un-authorized equipment (thumb drives, hubs, etc) to better manage what is/is not on our network.
Debugging is easy, as it tells you exactly within your job where the job failed, even when jumping around several playbooks.
Ansible seems to integrate with everything, and the community is big enough that if you are unsure how to approach converting a process into a playbook, you can usually find something similar to what you are trying to do.
Security in AAP seems to be pretty straightforward. Easy to organize and identify who has what permissions or can only see the content based on the organization they belong to.
When I first started using ManageEngine Endpoint Central, the UI felt very complicated and cluttered up, which means as a new user, it took a lot of time to get used to using it and knowing where certain features are. This was also because specific features aren't obvious to the user, it can take time to find them through multiple routes.
When pushing out specifc software to a large number of endpoint devices such as 1500 in my organisation, the deployment fails a lot more meaning some devices dont receive the software and this has to be done manually for them. This can take a lot of time.
When an issue is reported about ManageEngine Endpoint Central, for example it constantly crashing when being heavily used. The support was delayed and it took a lot of time for first line support to address the issue and escalate it.
I can't think of any right now because I've heard about the Lightspeed and I'm really excited about that. Ansible has been really solid for us. We haven't had any issues. Maybe the upgrade process, but other than that, as coming from a user, it's awesome.
ManageEngine is considered an excellent product due to its comprehensive suite of solutions for IT management, with ManageEngine Endpoint Central specifically excelling in endpoint management. The platform stands out for its user-friendly interface, robust features, and versatility in addressing diverse IT needs. It offers organizations a centralized solution for endpoint security, patch management, software deployment, and asset management
Even is if it's a great tool, we are looking to renew our licence for our production servers only. The product is very expensive to use, so we might look for a cheaper solution for our non-production servers. One of the solution we are looking, is AWX, free, and similar to AAP. This is be perfect for our non-production servers.
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.
It's overall pretty easy to use foe all the applications I've mentioned before: configuring hosts, installing packages through tools like apt, applying yaml, making changes across wide groups of hosts, etc. Its not a 10 because of the inconveinience of the yaml setup, and the time to write is not worth it for something applied one time to only a few hosts
Great in almost every way compared to any other configuration management software. The only thing I wish for is python3 support. Other than that, YAML is much improved compared to the Ruby of Chef. The agentless nature is incredibly convenient for managing systems quickly, and if a member of your term has no terminal experience whatsoever they can still use the UI.
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.
There is a lot of good documentation that Ansible and Red Hat provide which should help get someone started with making Ansible useful. But once you get to more complicated scenarios, you will benefit from learning from others. I have not used Red Hat support for work with Ansible, but many of the online resources are helpful.
I tend to use a combination of solutions to keep the estate running efficiently. ManageEngine Endpoint Central has more control over the timing of patching for users. Juggling users being able to work and keeping systems up to date with user satisfaction in mind is a monthly goal. Pushing updates with giving users some control seems to be working.
AAP compares favorably with Terraform and Power Automate. I don't have much experience with Terraform, but I find AAP and Ansible easier to use as well as having more capabilities. Power Platform is also an excellent automation tool that is user friendly but I feel that Ansible has more compatibility with a variety of technologies.
It has greatly helped us with our compliances through the compliance scans, such as taking our CIS compliance from 36% up to around 90%.
It has massively reduced the number of application/patch vulnerabilities through automated patching & dynamic configurations with custom scripts. From 60 criticals and 300 highs down to just 5 criticals and 25 highs, very quickly.
It has helped us identify issues with our Bitlocker not syncing to Azure AD properly, because the recovery keys in ManageEngine were always correct but werent always correct in Azure AD.
POSITIVE: currently used by the IT department and some others, but we want others to use it.
NEGATIVE: We need less technical output for the non-technical. It should be controllable or a setting within playbooks. We also need more graphical responses (non-technical).
POSITIVE: Always being updated and expanded (CaC, EDA, Policy as Code, execution environments, AI, etc..)
