Microsoft System Center Service Manager vs. SMART Service Desk

I think any organization that runs windows on their computers that is size over 50 workstations and looking for a complete package to manage their windows machines must have Microsoft System Center Service Manager, especially if they have Windows servers and VMs. The capability of managing multiple devices at ones can save a lot of time for the IT jobs.

Incentivized

• Imaging - Can hold all of your images and allow them to be deployed from one central place
• Patching - Able to manage patches from a central database and have reporting on machines out of compliance
• Reporting - ability to utilize several reports to check compliance and other items you may want to review

Incentivized

• Reporting in System Center could be more user-friendly. While the data is there, sometimes several reports have to be run to get what you want
• SCCM would be better making updates to SCCM easier. We see risk in updates, so it causes delays, which creates more risk
• Improving the application deployment log files , making them easier to read

Incentivized

The customer support service is excellent. They help from start/deployment through to any time later on. They responded quickly and resolved our issues professionally and in no time.

Incentivized

It has its similarities between the two from a ticketing standpoint but as a primarily Microsoft shop it is nice to have a product that was created to play along with other tools that we are using such as SCCM. We like Jira for the project management tools and Cherwell for their customization but the latter took lots of effort to get that piece working.

Incentivized

• "Quick" patch management -- once the process is nailed down.
• The ability to include remote control in a central place.
• Reporting is great.

Incentivized