Sign-in Systems - InVentry Concerns - Alternatives?

[interslice]

We are looking to deploy a sign-in system and the first name that came to mind was InVentry after seeing their flashy displays at BETT etc. Having gone through the sales call and getting to the stage where we are about to pull the trigger, I've been presented with their network configuration/technical requirements and I am concerned to say the least! I'm wondering whether anyone else has had these concerns and discussions lately and whether an alternative provider was sought as a result. I've seen the "Inventry Had its day" thread and am not reassured in the slightest; so am after some feedback or suggestions for an alternative platform.

 

My concerns:

• InVentry isn't a proper cloud-only/cloud-first solution - it is simply a Windows 11 PC running running their app. We were told that we have to supply our own antivirus and back the system up to an on-site share. Given we are very close to serverless (one finance Sage DB file share left), the last thing we want is to be dropping back to exposing SMB shares for InVentry! When we queried this (we plan to purchase multiple screens as we have a nursery building that is physically separate from the main primary), we were told they could get the screens to back up to one-another - this seems an awful way of doing things! They also suggested plugging a USB stick into each screen to back up to - which doesn't sit right with me!!
• InVentry don't monitor their supplied hardware - no RMM is used and TeamViewer or LogMeIn are used for remote access and support if needed - again this seems like an awful way of doing things. As an LGfL school, we'll have to consent to 3rd party remote access tools etc. - all do-able, but surprising that this is needed! Am I overreacting here or is this a completely crazy way of "supporting" their hardware? It also seems we will have no admin access to the hardware.
• InVentry don't supply any endpoint protection solution or monitor their hardware for vulnerabilities - building on the last point; they have said that their solution will come with the free Windows Defender antivirus; but be unmonitored by them - again surely this is a bit of a cop out. We are effectively (if we go ahead) ending up with hardware that is unmonitored, potentially unpatched and that we have no admin access to!

 

Has anyone else run into these issues and what was the outcome. Am I overreacting here? Their call to clarify these issues didn't really present any proper solutions to mitigate my concerns and we were told that practically no other schools have issues with the way they do things!

 

Thanks in advance!

[Zedster1974-MGS]

Showing my age on this - but, and this is my personal opinion and does not reflect or in anyway show any comment regarding my employer - to quote Zammo from Grange Hill - Just Say No.... 

[MatthewL]

I'm not surprised and no you are not overreacting, I would do be the same.  I would have asked the same questions but with a lot of companies like that they do not realise the business they are throwing away, the small added value costs them business.

 

I would look at SignIn that is cloud based, runs on tablets as opposed to Windows machines.

[MrEprise]

I'm actually surprised they gave you W11 compatible hardware as our setup went in about a couple of years ago and what they gave us was already out-of-date and not W11 compatible in the slightest!

 

That it also runs a client OS isn't much good either, especially if numerous staff members are supposed to be using the Console application as Windows 10/11 has a connection limit and this is used up pretty quickly, especially if you have 2 or more terminals. I had to try and figure out how to run the Console app from one of our servers and share it out to staff that way. Bit of a clunky way of doing it but it seems to work.

 

We have a utility that backs the database onto one of our servers but no backups of the OS itself so if that goes on one of the terminals, I can imagine that'll be a costly support call.

 

To me, it is a very clunky mess (much like SIMS .net) that should be avoided where possible as there are much better alternatives out there.

[StormTrooper59]

We have Inventry at my 2 schools (not my choice), and I wouldn't recommend it. In my experiences with them, we have a Cloud Console which only a handful of staff are able to login to, as the remaining staff have issues with not getting a valid token, and there support team seems stumped but it doesn't seem to get progressed/escalated up the chain. The Cloud Console often doesn't report the correct numbers of staff signed in, or visitors. It has very limited reports compared to the "full" console version. 

 

Unless you plan to put the Inventry Screen/PC on the domain, you will struggle to connect to a console via W11 PC as NTLM has been depreciated and they don't seem to have come up with a new method. 

 

There 1st line support is Outsourced outside of the UK and it is not always easy to get put through to the 2nd line team who seem to be UK based. The 1st line team just seem to read from a script and I've found it's not very helpful for the issues we've encountered. 

 

It really is the SIMS.net of signing in systems in my opinion. 

 

Good Luck if you go down the Inventry Path...

[paulkerton]

20 hours ago, interslice said:

Has anyone else run into these issues and what was the outcome. Am I overreacting here? Their call to clarify these issues didn't really present any proper solutions to mitigate my concerns and we were told that practically no other schools have issues with the way they do things!

Well, I guess that's the case with their existing customers, but for those of us who have moved cloud first, have they not considered that people are already aware that they don't have a decent cloud solution, their solutions don't meet our minimum requirements and therefore they're not considered to begin with?

[drutt]

We've used Sign in App since around 2018 and have no intention of changing, we have 5 iPads; 1 in Reception for visitors, 1 in our staff entry-way for Staff, 1 in the entrance to our Sixth Form block, 1 for fire evacuation and another used by attendance for marking in late students at the front gate. They all work great. I've personally been using the auto-sign in and out feature for a couple of years now, works great with the geo-fence setup and I generally don't have to pay attention to signing in or out each day.

 

Staff/Sixth Form have their cards registered upon creation but can also choose to sign in via the mobile app with a QR code

 

Visitors quickly fill in what they need at the Reception iPad (including fire evac notice and questions on whether they have any accessibility requirements), and a paper badge gets printed and handed to them with the important details.

Edited August 21, 2025 by cnewstead

[Pottsey]

Best thing we ever did was move away from InVentry and go to Sign in App. 

 

"we were told that practically no other schools have issues with the way they do things!"

That doesn't sound right. There are multiple entire MATs that left them due to issues with the way they do things. My previous MAT put in an official complaint related to outdated practices that caused us major problems.
 

Just need to read some of the threads on here to see its multiple unrelated people with similar problems.

[psydii]

All the technological/security/operational concerns (for single site installations) can be overcome with an AD Join, appropriate settings deployed by GPO and your LGfL Sophos licence.

 

However, since you  are philosophically (and practically) committed to a serverless environment, I would say the Inventry system is not the right product for you.

[paulkerton]

6 minutes ago, psydii said:

However, since you  are philosophically (and practically) committed to a serverless environment, I would say the Inventry system is not the right product for you.

So Inventry are committed to the horse and cart whilst everyone else has upgraded to cars. Got it.

[interslice]

Thanks @psydii - the idea was that if we are paying for maintenance etc, surely basic security and backup should be handled by them - ideally configure, set and forget?

 

Their network config document states:

Quote

 

A typical installation for InVentry will be for your screen to be installed as a workgroup device however if you wish the screen can be added to your domain.

If you require the screen to be on the domain, you will need to ensure it does not have any adverse effects with the InVentry software.

• Group policies – Precaution may need to be taken regarding group policies being applied to the InVentry system as this could cause issues with certain areas/services of the software e.g. unit rebooting, autologin, auto screen lock and power saving mode.
• Local admin account access – If you are unable to provide full administrative access to the InVentry user this could restrict services from starting/running.
• Remote access – It is imperative remote access is permitted for the InVentry Support Team to provide assistance.

 

 

Remote access is via Teamviewer - and they require unattended access which is still an issue for me - apparently, I am in the minority here and most schools have no issue with this?

 

And yes, we are nearly serverless (lingering file share/finance server) so didn't want to be heading back that way.

[paulkerton]

Local admin account access?!
What the fudge...

[interslice]

Thank you everybody for your replies and insights so far.

 

I have had a look at Sign In App and it seems just what we are after - it has the majority of the featureset of InVentry (no digital lock/Paxton integration - we don't use these systems anyway!) and is cloud-first!

 

We'll get a demo booked

 

[interslice]

@paulkerton Exactly - lots of their methods seem half-baked at best - especially their backup suggestion when I said we weren't happy about potentially having to provision local storage/SMB shares for the screen DB backups! Their idea was to have screen 1 back up it's data to screen 2 and vice-versa (when I chuckled at the USB stick idea!!!) - amazing considering the file sharing limitations of a client OS!

[Pottsey]

1 minute ago, interslice said:

Thanks @psydii - the idea was that if we are paying for maintenance etc, surely basic security and backup should be handled by them - ideally configure, set and forget?

 

Their network config document states:

 

Remote access is via Teamviewer - and they require unattended access which is still an issue for me - apparently, I am in the minority here and most schools have no issue with this?

 

And yes, we are nearly serverless (lingering file share/finance server) so didn't want to be heading back that way.

That's how it was for us. Teamviewer and a few other remote tools often old versions that had not been updated in years, full of security problems and they wanted full admin access which was the least of the problems we ran into with InVentry. There product was made for single sites and had all sorts of work arounds and problems across muti sites or even a MAT. It wasn't just the product, there staff procedures (at the time we used them) was outdated and clashed with how many MAT are setup. 

[psydii]

15 minutes ago, paulkerton said:

So Inventry are committed to the horse and cart whilst everyone else has upgraded to cars. Got it.

I moderate my language to avoid libel, but that is not an entirely inaccurate assessment.

[psydii]

12 minutes ago, paulkerton said:

Local admin account access?!
What the fudge...

Accepting your previous assessment, I'm not sure how they could maintain and update / upgrade a service without having administrative access to the box on which the service is installed. 

 

Its fundamentally a product built on 1990s-2010's Microsoft architecture with locally hosted Windows/SQL/ .net framework based servers and clients (the aforementioned horse and cart). It is what it is, and increasingly it is not the right product for people in the 2020's. 

[StephenPink]

Yep we're also moving away from Inventry for the reasons most have mentioned. They don't want you to domain join - yet as you say don't monitor/manage/update - and then aren't helpful when there are security policy conflicts. 

My other issues was cost - the hardware is very expensive, and the same cost each time for additional displays. Sign In App is one cost - 1 display or 20 (and we have an iPad school so plenty of slightly older iPads kicking around!) and so far so good with it.

Cheers

[interslice]

58 minutes ago, psydii said:

Accepting your previous assessment, I'm not sure how they could maintain and update / upgrade a service without having administrative access to the box on which the service is installed. 

 

Its fundamentally a product built on 1990s-2010's Microsoft architecture with locally hosted Windows/SQL/ .net framework based servers and clients (the aforementioned horse and cart). It is what it is, and increasingly it is not the right product for people in the 2020's. 

I understand the need for administrative access to the service etc. - this would mean tailoring the security policy for the OU that the InVentry devices are a part of - not an issue unless you are planning to get-rid of local AD etc. As you have noted with your previous post, we are committed to being serverless (eventually), so this is at odds with our roadmap, so ultimately, looks like this isn't the solution for us.

[Planehazza]

Been with Inventry for years, but personally I'm keen to ditch ASAP. We're looking to SignIn App for a proper cloud solution and a simple iPad. We all hate iPads in IT, but chuck an iPad on your MDM, lock it to the app and you're away. Inventry support has gone down the pan too.

 

As others have mentioned, they're crazy expensive and slow to develop. They kind of remind me of SIMS to be honest. I've had a support call in to chase up the migration of ~10 sites from one MIS integration to another, and all are at different states of affairs. You log a support ticket to get an update and they treat it like a fresh ticket and start right from the start again. I've had one email ticket in for 5 weeks and it's just going round in circles.

[JDawgg]

I'd make sure Sign In App does everything you want it to do, look into it thoroughly. 

I have a few sites and it isn't as customisable as Inventry. 

 

For example we have two designated staff members/fire marshal's that would account for staff. One looks out for teaching staff and the other accounts for support staff. Having a big site, this is needed really. 

 

When doing an evacuation on Sign In App, as the users are synced from Arbor using Wonde, it just outputs a big list, so no sub groups etc. 

Currently got a case logged with them for this, they recommend using user defined fields in Arbor but at every stage they seem to tell us it is possible, then come back to us to say their engineering team has looked into it and it is not in fact possible.

[Planehazza]

5 minutes ago, JensenFerdy said:

I'd make sure Sign In App does everything you want it to do, look into it thoroughly. 

I have a few sites and it isn't as customisable as Inventry. 

 

For example we have two designated staff members/fire marshal's that would account for staff. One looks out for teaching staff and the other accounts for support staff. Having a big site, this is needed really. 

 

When doing an evacuation on Sign In App, as the users are synced from Arbor using Wonde, it just outputs a big list, so no sub groups etc. 

Currently got a case logged with them for this, they recommend using user defined fields in Arbor but at every stage they seem to tell us it is possible, then come back to us to say their engineering team has looked into it and it is not in fact possible.

Good to know, thank you. Thankfully, the school I currently have an order in for is a tiny primary. 

[synaesthesia]

40 minutes ago, JensenFerdy said:

I'd make sure Sign In App does everything you want it to do, look into it thoroughly. 

I have a few sites and it isn't as customisable as Inventry. 

 

For example we have two designated staff members/fire marshal's that would account for staff. One looks out for teaching staff and the other accounts for support staff. Having a big site, this is needed really. 

 

When doing an evacuation on Sign In App, as the users are synced from Arbor using Wonde, it just outputs a big list, so no sub groups etc. 

Currently got a case logged with them for this, they recommend using user defined fields in Arbor but at every stage they seem to tell us it is possible, then come back to us to say their engineering team has looked into it and it is not in fact possible.

Why's that an issue? You can just go into manage groups for that group, even when synced and select who needs access to what regarding evacuations, access levels etc?

 

[psydii]

1 hour ago, Planehazza said:

 You log a support ticket to get an update and they treat it like a fresh ticket and start right from the start again. I've had one email ticket in for 5 weeks and it's just going round in circles.

I've found it often feels like they deprioritise requests from IT but jump on things raised by the School Business Manager.

[JDawgg]

On 09/12/2025 at 10:41, synaesthesia said:

Why's that an issue? You can just go into manage groups for that group, even when synced and select who needs access to what regarding evacuations, access levels etc?

 

Because we need separate grouping due to having a lot of staff, rather than one generic 'staff' list.