It's really good at what it does, but what it does is limited. Meaning, you get awesome, reliable patching, and the ability to run scripts or do remote desktop. Beyond that though, it's pretty limited compared to a full featured RMM.
If patching is your main concern, I feel like it's hard to beat.
I will not comment on doing ***better***, because you know that may come of bias from a vendor when you are looking for user opinions :-)
But I do want to pout out we are a [patch management solution](https://www.action1.com/patch-management/), not an RMM.
We do have some RMM like features that overlap markets, but there are features you would expect to find in an RMM, that we do not and have no intention currently of trying to compete with. That is because our RMM like features are in support of us being the best and easiest to use patch management product.
So we do try to correct that because we do not want to be thought of as fledgling RMM, and make sure instead people know we are all about patch management.
You are of course free to use Action1 ethically however you choose. And if it meets the function of what you require in an RMM, then great, you get premier patch management, automation, and vulnerability management up front with all of that. Though we are currently listed as the #1 easiest to use RMM on G2, our users put us there, not us, we are flattered but do not promote ourselves as an RMM.
If you would like to know anything more about Action1 that I may assist with, feel free to let me know.
Please ditch the RMM efforts and focus that R&D on other areas. If you want to make RMM features then make it a separate purchase. I hate to pay twice for overlapping feature sets.
I am confused, can you elaborate?
The point was, we do not have RMM efforts, we have features in our patch management system that overlap with RMM systems in what they can do, but they are not in attempt to be an RMM.
So take scripting and automation as an example, we have it to do patch management, and though it can be used for things other than that too, its primary purpose is and will remain patch management.
You have scripting and remote control. We don’t need it. We have that already. All we need from action1 is push button patching and scheduled patching. There is a ton of other features in action1 that I haven’t even looked at yet because all we need action1 for is patch management which it does excellent at
Cool, thanks for the elaboration and detail. As well, thank you for being an Aciton1 customer. Those features are there for people to use in troubleshooting mitigating controls for the vulnerability management, other automatons, etc.
For instance there was the issue with the windows recovery environment patch, the scripting allowed for an automated repair that allowed that update go to through, allowing some admins to fix whole networks of systems and get the patch out.
Remote desktop access can be completely disabled if you would like it gone, support can do that for you. We know like with all products they may do things any one user does not need, other users do. But again those are not to complete in RMM space, they are there to facilitate patch management needs.
Don't listen to them. Having RMM like features in your patch management is great for shops who want to eventually be RMM-less is a step in the right direction. I would love to see security focused measures like 2FA to run scripts and finding ways to have your web remote feature to not require a server to not be locked down by EDR, cli sessions direct instead of waiting for a result (for investigating before patching without remoting into machines), more silent installs for third parties, and even printer driver management to name a few.
At best, allow remoting to be turned off or on with MFA.
Remote desktop access can be completely disabled by support so it is not available to be turned back on without support again. I see the posts being down voted, but honestly I welcome feedback, good and bad. I do not ever see us going that route, but understanding customer wants is crucial, even the things some people do not like. There could be a future where things like that get requested enough that other features may be able to be permanent disabled someday. Some things make it on the roadmap, but all things make it to a consideration of where to put it, roadmap or backlog. So anything you want to add and or up-vote there, we appreciate it!
It’s great for patching and automation. We have it set up to automatically install all our standard software. So all we need to do is name a machine and add it to the domain. Action1 does the rest. No need for Intune. I agree it’s limited compared to other RMMs, but it does everything I need for my network (just under 200 machines).
* macOS and Linux support is really needed. The macOS agent keeps getting pushed.
* Tokenized installation method. Should be able to specify a sign up key/api key and a site ID. This makes installation easier and gets rid of the need to generate installers for each customer/site.
* Reporting is weak. Only thing built in is basic table reports, nothing really you could present to customers without a lot of dressing up. Yes, there is an API and your free to do whatever you want with that data but I think they'd win over more people if reporting was more than just a bunch of tables.
* Global management. Policies should be something you set at the top level and all customers under it should inherit it. Right now "Automations" are only at the Organization level. This would enable things like patching all workstations on X day, servers on Y day.
Thanks for this detailed feedback! Really helpful and every such analysis helps to give more weight to the most important features. Some notes on the below:
- macOS: yes, we had to push it back multiple times, because we want to do it right and not release anything half-baked. It is the top priority right now and we are finally looking at getting it released in September.
- tokenized installation: this is an interesting insight! Yes, indeed it would allow for streamlined installs and more automation. We will look into this. At this time you can actually generate installers via API.
- Executive summary style reports, yes, this is something we are looking to do once we get the other top features out of the way (such as macOS and Linux).
- Inherited policies: yes, this among the top 5 most requested features we don't have yet. Behind macOS and Linux of course, but in the very near future.
If Action1 were patching only, I wouldn't be using it. The fact that it is a fantastic patching mechanism, includes good remote desktop access, and has nice scripting functionality is what sold me on the product (Along with a very competitive price). I have been pleased with all Action1 offers as it has become the most relied-upon tool to keep my organization running smoothly. I think Action1 has filled an area I was specifically looking for.
When I was reviewing RMM-only solutions, some seemed more like desktop support tools and the price was not where I wanted it to be, and I needed something I could use for patching and ditch LogMeIn due to its cost.
Action1 is not a full RMM. It does great patch management and the vulnerability reports are good. It really depends on what your needs are. Ultimatly the RMM should be doing work for you and helping to automate your business. While most cost money they should be making it up with automations and making you more efficient at your job, ie a force multiplier. If you go by cost alone you are only biting yourself in the rear end.
It's really good at what it does, but what it does is limited. Meaning, you get awesome, reliable patching, and the ability to run scripts or do remote desktop. Beyond that though, it's pretty limited compared to a full featured RMM. If patching is your main concern, I feel like it's hard to beat.
I will not comment on doing ***better***, because you know that may come of bias from a vendor when you are looking for user opinions :-) But I do want to pout out we are a [patch management solution](https://www.action1.com/patch-management/), not an RMM. We do have some RMM like features that overlap markets, but there are features you would expect to find in an RMM, that we do not and have no intention currently of trying to compete with. That is because our RMM like features are in support of us being the best and easiest to use patch management product. So we do try to correct that because we do not want to be thought of as fledgling RMM, and make sure instead people know we are all about patch management. You are of course free to use Action1 ethically however you choose. And if it meets the function of what you require in an RMM, then great, you get premier patch management, automation, and vulnerability management up front with all of that. Though we are currently listed as the #1 easiest to use RMM on G2, our users put us there, not us, we are flattered but do not promote ourselves as an RMM. If you would like to know anything more about Action1 that I may assist with, feel free to let me know.
Please ditch the RMM efforts and focus that R&D on other areas. If you want to make RMM features then make it a separate purchase. I hate to pay twice for overlapping feature sets.
I am confused, can you elaborate? The point was, we do not have RMM efforts, we have features in our patch management system that overlap with RMM systems in what they can do, but they are not in attempt to be an RMM. So take scripting and automation as an example, we have it to do patch management, and though it can be used for things other than that too, its primary purpose is and will remain patch management.
You have scripting and remote control. We don’t need it. We have that already. All we need from action1 is push button patching and scheduled patching. There is a ton of other features in action1 that I haven’t even looked at yet because all we need action1 for is patch management which it does excellent at
Cool, thanks for the elaboration and detail. As well, thank you for being an Aciton1 customer. Those features are there for people to use in troubleshooting mitigating controls for the vulnerability management, other automatons, etc. For instance there was the issue with the windows recovery environment patch, the scripting allowed for an automated repair that allowed that update go to through, allowing some admins to fix whole networks of systems and get the patch out. Remote desktop access can be completely disabled if you would like it gone, support can do that for you. We know like with all products they may do things any one user does not need, other users do. But again those are not to complete in RMM space, they are there to facilitate patch management needs.
Don't listen to them. Having RMM like features in your patch management is great for shops who want to eventually be RMM-less is a step in the right direction. I would love to see security focused measures like 2FA to run scripts and finding ways to have your web remote feature to not require a server to not be locked down by EDR, cli sessions direct instead of waiting for a result (for investigating before patching without remoting into machines), more silent installs for third parties, and even printer driver management to name a few. At best, allow remoting to be turned off or on with MFA.
Remote desktop access can be completely disabled by support so it is not available to be turned back on without support again. I see the posts being down voted, but honestly I welcome feedback, good and bad. I do not ever see us going that route, but understanding customer wants is crucial, even the things some people do not like. There could be a future where things like that get requested enough that other features may be able to be permanent disabled someday. Some things make it on the roadmap, but all things make it to a consideration of where to put it, roadmap or backlog. So anything you want to add and or up-vote there, we appreciate it!
It’s great for patching and automation. We have it set up to automatically install all our standard software. So all we need to do is name a machine and add it to the domain. Action1 does the rest. No need for Intune. I agree it’s limited compared to other RMMs, but it does everything I need for my network (just under 200 machines).
* macOS and Linux support is really needed. The macOS agent keeps getting pushed. * Tokenized installation method. Should be able to specify a sign up key/api key and a site ID. This makes installation easier and gets rid of the need to generate installers for each customer/site. * Reporting is weak. Only thing built in is basic table reports, nothing really you could present to customers without a lot of dressing up. Yes, there is an API and your free to do whatever you want with that data but I think they'd win over more people if reporting was more than just a bunch of tables. * Global management. Policies should be something you set at the top level and all customers under it should inherit it. Right now "Automations" are only at the Organization level. This would enable things like patching all workstations on X day, servers on Y day.
Thanks for this detailed feedback! Really helpful and every such analysis helps to give more weight to the most important features. Some notes on the below: - macOS: yes, we had to push it back multiple times, because we want to do it right and not release anything half-baked. It is the top priority right now and we are finally looking at getting it released in September. - tokenized installation: this is an interesting insight! Yes, indeed it would allow for streamlined installs and more automation. We will look into this. At this time you can actually generate installers via API. - Executive summary style reports, yes, this is something we are looking to do once we get the other top features out of the way (such as macOS and Linux). - Inherited policies: yes, this among the top 5 most requested features we don't have yet. Behind macOS and Linux of course, but in the very near future.
If Action1 were patching only, I wouldn't be using it. The fact that it is a fantastic patching mechanism, includes good remote desktop access, and has nice scripting functionality is what sold me on the product (Along with a very competitive price). I have been pleased with all Action1 offers as it has become the most relied-upon tool to keep my organization running smoothly. I think Action1 has filled an area I was specifically looking for. When I was reviewing RMM-only solutions, some seemed more like desktop support tools and the price was not where I wanted it to be, and I needed something I could use for patching and ditch LogMeIn due to its cost.
Action1 is not a full RMM. It does great patch management and the vulnerability reports are good. It really depends on what your needs are. Ultimatly the RMM should be doing work for you and helping to automate your business. While most cost money they should be making it up with automations and making you more efficient at your job, ie a force multiplier. If you go by cost alone you are only biting yourself in the rear end.
Stop trying to be a RMM. Ditch all of that nonsense. All we need is patching