vs. patch deployment tools
The tool knows how to push.
It doesn't know how to ask permission.
WSUS, SCCM, the modern endpoint-management tools — all of them do the technically hard thing well: get a package onto thousands of machines, reboot in the right order, and report what succeeded. What none of them has is everything that happens before: who approves, when it is allowed, and what goes down with what.
What this category is genuinely good at
What a deployment tool is genuinely good at
These are capabilities we do not build and do not intend to.
Distribution at scale
Packages, distribution points, bandwidth control, retries. Real infrastructure work.
Rings and phasing
Pilot ring, then broad deployment, with automatic halt when something breaks.
Compliance-to-baseline reporting
How many machines are actually at the defined patch level, and which ones are not.
You already have one
In most organisations this tool is installed, familiar and going nowhere. Nor does it need to.
Where the handoff breaks
A maintenance window in a deployment tool is a configuration field, not an agreement.
The window is a setting, not a negotiation
You define "Sunday 02:00–04:00" on a collection. Nobody asked the system owner whether that suits them this month.
No approval is kept
There is a record that the install ran. There is no record that somebody authorised it in advance, and that is what an auditor asks for.
The machine is the boundary
The tool knows machines and collections. It does not know this machine is the database another system leans on.
What isn't in the tool doesn't exist
Network equipment, databases, systems with no agent — all part of the same window and none of them part of the same tool.
What Regulaxy adds
The layer that decides what goes into the window and who agreed to it.
A window with an owner
A time somebody approved by name, not a setting on a collection.
Every asset type in one window
Hosts, databases and network equipment selected into the same event, even when they live in different tools.
Collisions between systems
A warning when two linked systems are booked for the same time.
Documentation that outlives it
Approval, checklist and export. The tool reports what ran; this records why and on whose authority.
Same job, two tools
Where the deployment tool wins, the row says so.
| The job | Deployment tool | Regulaxy |
|---|---|---|
| Install the patch | Its job: packaging, reboot, retries. | Installs nothing. |
| Compliance to baseline | Who is at the required patch level and who is not. | Not measured. Reads last-patched dates from your inventory. |
| Book a window | A configuration field on a collection. | A dated event with an owner, an approval and a calendar invite. |
| Approval in advance | Out of scope. | Approval in writing, timestamped, with the text that was sent. |
| Dependencies between systems | Machine collections, not a dependency graph. | A map built from actual host-to-host traffic, and a collision warning. |
| Assets with no agent | Out of scope for most tools. | Databases and network equipment enter the same window. |
| Reminding a person | None. The tool talks to machines. | A calendar invite and an SMS to the system owner. |
| Audit evidence | An installation log. | Approval, checklist, audit log and export. |
When you would not need Regulaxy
In these cases the tool you have is enough, and a coordination layer only adds work:
- When you patch in automatic rings and nobody has to approve. A ring model that works is an excellent model, and Regulaxy would be in the way of it.
- When maintenance windows are standing and uncontested. A fixed window everyone respects needs no coordination.
- When the whole estate is managed in one tool with nothing outside it. A large part of the value here is unifying asset types that live in different tools.
- When downtime tolerance is high. If you can reboot a system at 2pm and nobody notices, there is no problem here to solve.
- When there is no documentation requirement. With no audit and no regulator, a third of the product does not speak to you.
Your deployment tool stays either way. If there is no disagreement about when it is allowed to run, we have nothing to add.
The tool stays. The question is who decides when it runs.
We would like to see what a maintenance window looks like at your site today, from the moment somebody decides to the moment the install starts.