msp Archives | XOAP

AWS Systems Manager vs XOAP: Guide for MSPs

Stella — Mon, 13 Apr 2026 11:50:46 +0000

<\/path><\/svg>"},"no_headings_message":"No headings were found on this page.","minimize_box":"yes","minimized_on":"tablet","hierarchical_view":"yes","min_height":{"unit":"px","size":"","sizes":[]},"min_height_tablet":{"unit":"px","size":"","sizes":[]},"min_height_mobile":{"unit":"px","size":"","sizes":[]}}" data-widget_type="table-of-contents.default">

AWS Systems Manager and XOAP both help organizations manage infrastructure at scale. On the surface they overlap, but they were built for different situations. Knowing which one fits depends less on a feature comparison and more on understanding what each tool was originally designed to do.

What AWS Systems Manager does well

Built into the AWS platform, Systems Manager provides patch management, remote command execution, session management, secrets storage via Parameter Store and configuration enforcement through State Manager. Within a single AWS account running primarily EC2-based workloads, it is a natural fit, and many of its core features are included as part of standard AWS usage.

The product works best when the environment is largely AWS-native. The further an organization moves from that scenario, the more its limitations become relevant.

Where the two products differ:

Managing multiple clients

SSM is built around a single AWS organization. Keeping multiple clients properly separated typically means setting up separate AWS accounts with their own IAM policies. That works, but it adds setup time and ongoing maintenance overhead for every new client added.

Multi-tenancy is central to how XOAP is built, not something that needs to be configured around. Each client gets its own isolated space within the platform, with access controls and policies available by default. MSPs handling many clients will find this removes a significant amount of repetitive infrastructure work.

Hybrid and mixed environments

Through its hybrid activation feature, SSM can manage on-premises and non-AWS machines alongside cloud workloads. Its primary design target is still AWS, though, so managing infrastructure outside EC2 tends to require extra configuration steps that cloud-native workloads would not need.

XOAP treats cloud and on-premises infrastructure as equal from the outset. A server in a data center is handled the same way as a cloud instance, through the same interface and automation logic. Teams with a significant portion of infrastructure outside AWS will find day-to-day management considerably more consistent as a result.

Image management

AWS provides EC2 Image Builder for creating and maintaining machine images within AWS, with output in AMI format for EC2 workloads. XOAP’s Image Management is designed to work across both cloud and on-premises environments. Organizations that require consistent images across a mixed estate, rather than only within AWS, can benefit from the broader scope.

Cost

Many SSM features come at no additional cost within AWS. Getting it to work well across multiple clients or in hybrid environments, though, often requires building custom tooling to fill the gaps. That engineering time is a real cost, even if the software licence is not.

XOAP runs on a subscription model. The premise is that in multi-client or complex environments, the reduction in engineering overhead justifies the cost relative to building equivalent capabilities on top of native AWS tooling.

A real-world example

Consider an MSP onboarding a new client. The client has 40 Windows machines split between on-premises servers and AWS instances, and needs to prove patching compliance ahead of an upcoming audit.

With SSM, the team would need to configure hybrid activations for the on-premises machines, set up account-level separation to keep this client isolated from others and pull together a compliance report from multiple sources. None of this is impossible, but each step requires deliberate work outside the core tool.

The intended XOAP process is to create a new tenant, deploy the agent across all machines regardless of where they sit, apply the relevant policies and export a compliance report, with tenant isolation handled at the platform level throughout.
Both routes reach the same result. The difference is in how much surrounding work is needed to get there.

Which one?

SSM suits organizations running primarily on AWS, with teams comfortable in the AWS console and no significant need for multi-client isolation or cross-platform management.

XOAP is better positioned for MSPs and infrastructure teams managing multiple clients with strict separation requirements, working across a mix of cloud and on-premises environments, or wanting to reduce the manual effort involved in keeping automation consistent at scale.

Different tools, different contexts

AWS Systems Manager (SSM) and XOAP are designed for different priorities and operational realities, rather than serving the same need. XOAP’s focus is on supporting how organizations actually operate across diverse environments, so the right approach is one that aligns with real workflows and infrastructure requirements.

This distinction is worth considering carefully when evaluating either platform, particularly in multi-client or hybrid environments.

To see how XOAP handles these scenarios in practice, book a demo.

Also read:
→ Master the BIOS management
→ 30-day guaranteed IT automation delivery with XOAP
→ From cryptic SIDs to clear names: The end of Entra identity confusion
→ How XOAP modernizes Citrix MCS and PVS
→ How to automate AWS without using Terraform

Explore XOAP

Disclaimer:
This article is provided for informational and comparative purposes only. All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks mentioned are the property of their respective owners. The information presented reflects publicly available documentation and general product capabilities at the time of writing.

This comparison does not constitute legal, financial or procurement advice. Readers are encouraged to independently evaluate each platform based on official documentation and vendor guidance. Any references to pricing models reflect publicly available pricing information and are not legal or financial interpretations.

The analysis is intended to provide an objective overview of architectural differences and intended use cases, not to assert superiority, deficiency or competitive claims.

The post AWS Systems Manager vs XOAP: Guide for MSPs appeared first on XOAP.

From legacy to scalable: Rethinking AVD management for MSPs

Stella — Wed, 01 Apr 2026 08:44:54 +0000

Modern IT service providers are in the middle of a major transition: customers are rapidly moving workloads to the cloud, especially to Azure Virtual Desktop (AVD). But while infrastructure has evolved, management tooling often hasn’t. That gap is where inefficiencies, risk and operational complexity start to grow.

The truth about “good enough” tooling

For years, tools like Microsoft SCCM, Microsoft Deployment Toolkit, and Baramundi Management Suite formed the backbone of endpoint and system management. They were reliable. Familiar. Proven.

But they were also built for a different era:

On-premises infrastructure
Static environments
Single-tenant operations

Fast forward to today’s reality:

Multi-tenant Azure environments
Elastic infrastructure
Rapid deployment cycles
Distributed endpoints

Legacy tools weren’t designed for this.

Where legacy tools break in AVD environments

When MSPs attempt to extend traditional tooling into AVD, several friction points emerge:

1. Image management becomes slow and fragile

Golden image creation is still largely manual, time-consuming, often taking days, and difficult to standardize across tenants. As a result, environments are prone to drift, inconsistencies, and frequent rebuilds.

2. Application packaging lacks consistency

Even with frameworks like PSAppDeployToolkit, application packaging often varies between teams, deployment methods differ across environments, and reusability remains limited, leading to duplicated effort and higher failure rates.

3. No unified visibility across tenants

MSPs frequently operate across multiple dashboards, manage separate tenant logins, and rely on inconsistent reporting tools to monitor their environments. This fragmented approach results in the absence of a single source of truth, slower troubleshooting processes, and reduced confidence in consistently meeting SLAs.

4. Tool sprawl increases operational cost

Instead of working from a single platform, teams often rely on a combination of SCCM for device management, custom scripts for automation, Azure-native tools for cloud operations, and various third-party solutions for monitoring. This fragmented toolchain increases training overhead, creates specialist silos, and raises the risk of misconfiguration across environments.

What modern AVD management should look like

To operate efficiently at scale, MSPs need a cloud-first, multi-tenant-aware approach. This means:

Automated image lifecycle management

Version-controlled images
Repeatable builds
Rapid updates across environments

Standardized application delivery

One packaging method
Cross-platform compatibility
Centralized deployment logic

Centralized configuration and visibility

Unified dashboards
Cross-tenant insights
Real-time compliance tracking

Platform consolidation

Fewer tools
Less context switching
Lower operational overhead

How XOAP enables a unified approach

This is exactly the gap XOAP is designed to address, without forcing MSPs to abandon what already works. Instead, it connects and standardizes across environments.

1. Image Management: From manual to automated

XOAP enables:

Automated image creation for AVD, Azure, VMware, and more
Standardized, versioned images
Continuous lifecycle management

No more rebuilding images from scratch or tracking undocumented changes.

2. Application Management: Built on what teams already trust

XOAP leverages PSAppDeployToolkit as a foundation and extends it:

Centralized application catalog
Cross-platform deployment
Consistent packaging standards

3. Configuration Management: One view across all tenants

XOAP provides:

Unified policy management
Software inventory across environments
Compliance monitoring

No more logging into separate tenants to piece together insights.

The real opportunity for MSPs

The biggest advantage is the service differentiation. XOAP introduces a layering model:

XOAP handles automation and orchestration
MSPs build services on top

This allows you to:

Define your own service tiers
Package AVD management as a premium offering
Deliver consistent, scalable outcomes

Instead of selling tools, you’re delivering managed experience.

Practical example: Before vs after

Before (legacy stack):

SCCM + scripts + Azure tools
Manual image pipelines
Fragmented visibility
High operational overhead

After (unified with XOAP):

Single platform for lifecycle management
Automated image + application workflows
Centralized monitoring
Scalable across tenants

Final thoughts

Azure Virtual Desktop is not the problem, outdated management approaches are. If your team is still stitching together Microsoft SCCM, Microsoft Deployment Toolkit, and custom scripts to manage modern cloud environments, you’re carrying unnecessary complexity.

Start exploring a better way to manage Azure environments with XOAP. Create your free account and see how unified automation changes your operational model.