GFI LanGuard vs. ManageEngine Endpoint Central

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
GFI LanGuard
Score 8.0 out of 10
N/A
GFI LanGuard is software used to manage and maintain end-point protection across a network. It provides visibility into all the elements in the network, helping to assess where there may be potential vulnerabilities, and enables the administrator to patch them. It is a patch management and network auditing solution.N/A
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Score 9.3 out of 10
N/A
Desktop Central from ManageEngine is a client desktop management with patching, remote control, and configuration.N/A
Pricing
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Editions & Modules
No answers on this topic
No answers on this topic
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Free Trial
YesYes
Free/Freemium Version
NoNo
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Considered Both Products
GFI LanGuard
Chose GFI LanGuard
WSUS was the other alternative I considered but I believe GFI takes updates, reporting, and functionality to a different level for an enterprise/medium-size business environment.
ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
ManageEngine Endpoint Central was easier to use and more cost effective in the long run. It also provided a great integration with Service Desk Plus under one umbrella of products.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
I had already used SCCM in other companies, but when I joined the company I'm currently in, I started using Endpoint Central and I've been incredibly satisfied with the service and support.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
We did not use ManageEngine Endpoint Central over intune specifically, we run the solutions in parallel. This is ideal, as intune allows surface devices to be shipped and enrolled (no imaging, PXE or any intervention needed) The huge advantage of intune is we can ship the …
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
I chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central because it allows me to update devices, deploy configurations, install software, remotely patch, and monitor vulnerabilities.

Elegi ManageEngine Endpoint Central porque me permite actualizar equipos, desplegar configuraciones, instalar …
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
While some of these other Windows MDM solutions had some small improvements for something ManageEngine Endpoint Central does not have, I still find that ManageEngine Endpoint Central still has the biggest library, if you will, for functionality.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Splunk Enterprise, ManageEngine ServiceDesk Plus and Cybereason Managed Detection & Response (MDR)
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
It is overall better, locally deployed accessed via agent
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
more user friendly and superior documentation
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
It holds up very well even against the microsoft native solution Microsoft Intune.
The Configurations are easy to set up and apply quickly over the selected scope of Clients.
You have a almost real time inventory of everything detected by the agent.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
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 …
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Easier to implement, the agent can be deployed faster, the agent consumes fewer system resources. (TR)
Einfacher zu implementieren, der Agent lässt sich schneller ausrollen, der Agent verbraucht weniger Systemressourcen
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Its can always be integrated with ManageEngine other products, which is very useful.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Dollar for dollar, ManageEngine seems to be the most bang for your buck self-hosted solution. NinjaOne is cloud deployment only which can really add up over time, and KACE while better for scripting and asset management charges a premium for all of the extra modules that are …
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
They have no point of comparison
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
The reporting on scripts is far better in ManageEngine, always showing the latest result. Unlike Intune which can run a script every day, but the "Report" only shows the result from the first time the script ran, it never refreshes. When we have had issues where the LAPS …
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Other product like XCitium does not do USB block and is more pricier.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Compared to other product, cost, feature and easy management is main criteria to select ManageEngine Endpoint Central.
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Ease of use
Chose ManageEngine Endpoint Central
Much better patching capabilities
Best Alternatives
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Small Businesses
Action1
Action1
Score 9.5 out of 10
Avast CloudCare
Avast CloudCare
Score 10.0 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Action1
Action1
Score 9.5 out of 10
KACE Systems Management Appliance
KACE Systems Management Appliance
Score 10.0 out of 10
Enterprises
CrowdStrike Falcon
CrowdStrike Falcon
Score 9.0 out of 10
KACE Systems Management Appliance
KACE Systems Management Appliance
Score 10.0 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
-
(0 ratings)
8.3
(0 ratings)
Usability
-
(0 ratings)
7.9
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
7.0
(0 ratings)
7.8
(0 ratings)
Implementation Rating
-
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
GFI LanGuardManageEngine Endpoint Central
Likelihood to Recommend
-To track the vulnerability level of a windows network. -To push windows and other application updates from a central location. -Produce reports to highlight work being done to protect a network. In some organizations, you may have to prove for audit reasons you are enforcing policies put into place around cyber-security. This software can help you track work done on an ongoing basis for such purposes.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Pros
  • Install an agent to thoroughly scan machines to discover vulnerabilities.
  • Keeps there lists up-to-date with applications outside of windows and lets you know when an update is available.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
Cons
  • It could be a bit of information overload which some things are shown can become noise. Maybe different levels of "security" for lack of a better term may be better where you have a summary vs detailed level when it comes to rating the vulnerability of the entire network.
  • I find I sometimes have issues with PCs on a different network accessed across a VPN where timeouts often occur with very large updates. This aspect can be improved.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Usability
No answers on this topic
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.
Read full review
Support Rating
I only tried to access there support once and it was a relatively pain-free process. They also have a lot of documentation available online which can be used to learn and tailor the software to suit your needs. It just takes time and effort to plan, execute and monitor going forward.
Read full review
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.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
WSUS was the other alternative I considered but I believe GFI takes updates, reporting, and functionality to a different level for an enterprise/medium-size business environment.
Read full review
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
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • Certainty. It allows you to know where on your network needs attention.
  • Peace of mind. As security professionals, we can only put the necessary things in place to prevent malicious persons from exploiting a network. The software allows you to know whether or not your risk of exploitation is high or low. and if high what to do with it.
Read full review
  • 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.
Read full review
ScreenShots

ManageEngine Endpoint Central Screenshots

Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of Screenshot of