System Center Configuration Manager Feedback

Suggestion box powered by UserVoice

How can we improve Configuration Manager?

Automatically upgrade all UI consoles when upgrade the site

Now that ConfigMgr is shipping many times a year - make it easy (automatic) to upgrade all the Admin UIs.

216 votes
Sign in
Sign in with: facebook google
Signed in as (Sign out)
You have left! (?) (thinking…)
Admindjam (Product Director, or Executive, System Center Configuration Manager) shared this idea  ·   ·  Flag idea as inappropriate…  ·  Admin →


Sign in
Sign in with: facebook google
Signed in as (Sign out)
  • Cherif BENAMMAR commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I have two ideas,
    1- have a built-in application for sccm console and updated each time a new console is to be installed,
    2- have the console update to be downloaded from DP instead of being done through UNC, with the same boundaries regulations for sccm client apps and packages and software updates deployments or even get it as a software update.

  • Admindjam (Product Director, or Executive, System Center Configuration Manager) commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate
  • Admindjam (Product Director, or Executive, System Center Configuration Manager) commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    reading through the comments, this item represents 2 things:
    1) If there was a web console, you'd never have to worry about upgrading it... so make it a web console.
    2) create a web based presentation layer from the admin UI (i.e. rewrite it in HTML 5.)

    There are a lot of sub bullets to this too:
    3) Require MFA for Admin UI access.
    4) create Rest or OData API for ConfigMgr, to make it easy to access from anywhere, and author customer web based UI

  • Scott Breen commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Given the frequency of updates and the new cloud world, it would make sense to provide the Configuration Manager console as a web application rather than an installed client. This would allow the console to be accessible from anywhere, allow new features to be deployed easier and remove the need for admin consoles to be updated during servicing. It could also be integrated with two factor authentication which some customers have previously asked me for. Obviously this is a huge change, however I think it would be really cool as most operations are server-side operations anyway.

    Better yet, this could make the dream of a cloud-based Configuration Manager as a service that little bit closer!

  • Craig Wilson commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    There is already one (of sorts) for SCOM, so why not for ConfigMgr

    Would be great for being able to remotely access the console when you can't install the full console.

  • Marctwain commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    this needs to happen like 5 years ago. Not just web, not just desktop but a hybrid option like Vsphere Web Client.

  • Qasim Mashwani commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I'm also for sticking with the desktop console, while web console sounds like a great idea on paper in practice it creates a whole host of issues related to extensibility, cost of deployment and overall complexity. As previous poster have noted, deploying a web console entails cost's and complexity that desktop clients do not face. Web console have their appeal but have many drawback as mentioned by the commenter who mentioned VMware web console.

  • Sean Bravener commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    the thing that people are forgetting with the MS stack is that in order to get a web console, you are going to also need IIS, .NET, ASP, and who knows what else. in order to run this, for a large org, you may need to deploy a whole new server which will cost several hundred dollars in licensing, several hundred in resources and who knows what else.
    Also it will be more difficult to install addon tools as it is going to be ab all or nothing model with a web console.
    with a thick client, you can set up a collection for all console installs and then just deploy the upgrade package to that collection. no muss no fuss.
    I am not denying that a thin client would be nice, but it is not the cure all solution.

  • David Stein commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    A centralized web portal makes sense. Works for Azure, Intune/EMS and SharePoint, so why not ConfigMgr? Also reduces the headaches of deploying console updates, and tracking users/usage. A web portal makes it much easier to log usage activity as well.

  • dorobert commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    To add to this, it would be awesome to have a web console for desktop admins, software approvers, etc. Full Admins using the console is not an issue. It is the individuals that have limited access in SCCM that I focus on the most. Partial web console is better than no web console.

  • Bernie commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Ideally follow the design patterns for the new azure portal and new office 365 admin portal.

  • Nicolas Vaneberg commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    BE able to use a webconsole instead of fat console, would be nice. Currently we're facing some issues about the reporting that is not working as expected due to console used on remote servers. A webconsole would be great to use for that case.

  • Rich commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Agree with Anon, VMWare's switch to web based consoles hasn't been flawless and I find things take longer to do as you're waiting for the browser to load each page, especially when there's alot of content.

    All for sticking with the 'full fat' console here.

  • David Stein commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    Replace the client-server console model with a web-hosted UI for ConfigMgr. Centralize RBAC for console management. Provide a mobile layout in addition to the desktop layout.

  • Nathan McNulty commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    @cgsilver, we have over 12,000 Macs, 4,000 iOS devices, and 2,000 Android based devices (in addition to all of our Windows machines). Currently I publish the console via RemoteApp which works for the most part, but a web interface would be a much better experience for many of our users.

    I do agree that the current console should not go away as there are a few things you would not be able to replicate in a web interface. I also worry about the use of Silverlight, Flash, Java, etc. in a web interface which is generally why those web based consoles are so terrible.

  • cgsilver commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I agree with Anonymous... why you Need webconsole? You are Managing an SW Deployment tool, why is it so difficult to put a bit of work in it and control Console deployments?

  • Nathan McNulty commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I don't know that the console needs to be retired, but I do agree that a web console would be a great addition and would provide the ability to manage ConfigMgr from non-Windows devices without having to rely on RDP.

    If you get a chance, take a look at the JAMF Casper Suite's web interface for managing most of their policies. It is extremely fast, clean, and responsive. There are still some features that require a "fat console" as you call it (like importing applications), but if you can at least start building a web interface to manage basic components, that would be a very welcome change.

  • Justin King commented  ·   ·  Flag as inappropriate

    I'd argue dropping the App Controller in System Center for the Windows Azure Pack was nothing but a good thing (OK, maybe more complex, but better in every way form a consumer perspective).

    I agree the VMware switch had some huge roadblocks, but MS seems to understand what's needed to make the web transition work.

← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base