Does anyone have a solid overview of how Kaseya compares to other MSPs?
I'm not looking for a product list from Kaseya. I'm also not looking for an emotionally charged rant - in either direction.
I'm looking for a side-by-side comparison - like I'm comparing two cars and want to see how each capability compares against another company. I'd like to see how Kaseya stacks up against companies like LANDesk, Symantec, Dell KACE, Microsoft SCCM, etc.
I'm not sure that any such thing even exists.
Anything you are likely to find in terms of 'side by side' comparison will have either come directly from one of the vendors involved or have been sponsored by one of them, so it's always going to weighted in favour of one or the other. We've done our best to avoid producing side by side comparisons not only for this reason, but also the fact that the moment they are printed they are out of date, especially if you are writing about someone else's product as it's nearly impossible to keep up with every facet of every one of the above products, they change often, and it can be hard for any one person to know the whole product.
The other big challenge with side by side comparisons is that they are very open to interpretation. For example I saw a side-by-side comparison with Kaseya and a competitors product, obviously written by that competitor, which put a 'tick' in the box next to 'Heavy Agent Based Communication' and obviously no tick in the box next to 'Agent-less Communication'. Now quite apart from the fact that there is nothing heavy either about our 1.4MB Agent or it's extremely light-weight (and patented for that reason) communication method, the point they were trying to elude to is that somehow Agentless is better than having Agents. Now we could go back and forth on that particular subject for eternity, but the fact is that Kaseya is a hybrid product, so where it makes sense you can put our _one_ Agent that is used for everything on a box, or where it doesn't make sense we can do things Agentlessly. Do you think the side by side comparison bothered to stop and explain the difference or highlight that fact? No, it suited them better to just tick one box and not the other.
If you do a search online for Florida International University and Kaseya Comparison you will find a number of research documents done by students at that university comparing some of the products you mentioned. For transparency I believe the work may have been sponsored by if not commissioned by Kaseya, but from what I can see they appear to be unbiased and provide information rather than opinion, but you can read them and make your own choice.
I still believe the best way to approach this matter is to not look at any tools at all to begin with, but instead write down a list of what you _think_ you want from a tool. Be clear before you even begin your search what it is you need to do or achieve with your IT, or even just list areas of how you approach IT today that do and don't work. Then get involved in a sales cycle with the software providers and have them show you how you can achieve the ends you are wanting with their products. If you are very clear about what you want from any tool, you'll find it won't take long to weed out those that might suit your needs or not. There is no such thing as the 'best product', just the 'best fit for your needs'.
I did my best not to 'rant' or give a product list, so I hope some of the information is useful.
Hi Ray. Playing devils advocate here you're rightly defensive of the fact that the agent is very lightweight, something I've always liked compared to other products I've tested, though everything I've ever read about KNM bangs on about agentless technology and how that's a good thing. Surely this isn't just marketeer speak?
@Alistair - Uh oh, as Ray mentioned we could have this discussion for eternity :) But I think what Ray was saying is that Kaseya offers what we believe to be the best solution. We believe agents are best for management and agent-less is best for monitoring. We leverage both methods (and this is not just through KNM. The original Monitoring module used agentless monitoring for SNMP).
Yes Alistair, thats the whole 'Hybrid' thing that I was talking to. We have a whole white paper on it somewhere which if I can find I'll send over. We have Agent technology for when you need it (which if you're doing management is quite frankly most of the time) and as Max aludes to, we have Agent-less technology when it's needed as well; both in our core monitoring and in KNM. So we give the best of both worlds, and there is certainly times when one approach is better than the other thats why any decent management or monitoring tool needs to have both.
However I mentioned it only to point out that in side-by-side comparisons information is often twisted to benefit one party, like in the one that I saw that ignored our Agent-less capabilities and somehow tried to make out that all Agents are 'heavy' so ours must be too. As you can tell - bugs the c**p out of me. :-) My point was to warn our esteemed forum poster of the pitfalls of comparison documents and stick to trials/evaluations - its the only real way to make an informed decision in my opinion. If someone can't/won't let you trial their software, or its just too hard to try it - run!!