We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I rate the tool's stability a ten out of ten."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"Its user-friendliness is its most valuable aspect."
"Offers easy integration with a cloud-based infrastructure"
"The product's anti-spam and malware-scanning features are useful. We scan email attachments, documents, and malicious codes."
"The product is useful when the end user downloads malware files."
"The most valuable aspects are its integration capabilities with other Microsoft products like Intune, Office 365, and Azure cloud applications."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to provide threat detection and protection simultaneously."
"It provides complete security posture from end-to-end. This has given us better visibility into what our security aspects are."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the zero-trust security architecture."
"The most valuable feature is that you can launch it in a very short time. You don't have to wait for the hardware to arrive and get it staged and installed. From that perspective, it is easy to launch. It is also scalable."
"The VM series has an advantage over the physical version because we are able to change the sources that the machine has, such as the amount of available RAM."
"It is an easy-to-scale product."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series has everything centralized. You have the VPN solution, firewall, routing, UDR, flexibility, updates, and full visibility of your traffic."
"It has the ability to create Palo Alto VM-series using software."
"The VM-Series scalability is fast and easy to implement, improving our security posture as our Azure network grows."
"The product's dashboard and incident reports functionality needs enhancement."
"I would like to see more integration with other solutions. For example, integration well with Microsoft but not with other solutions."
"The solution could be more stable and precise because, at times, the threats detected are not legitimate."
"It would be beneficial to enhance the pricing structure and make it more affordable."
"A stable licensing model is absent"
"It takes time for the support team to understand the issue, and they then respond with a delay at times, which causes a lot of trouble."
"We encounter problems connecting the product deployed on the user endpoints with the servers."
"One area that can be improved is reducing false positives."
"The solution needs to improve its visibility. It's not straightforward to use. Understanding the policies, authorizations, and initializing features requires careful review. The product needs to offer proper training."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series needs to improve its order process."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"There should be an option for direct integration with the Azure platform."
"The interface is all Java-based. I would prefer an HTML5 interface."
"Just sometimes it can be a bit sluggish navigating through pages. That is just purely because of Java."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"There is no proper support channel to follow up on cases."
More Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is ranked 15th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 27 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 53 reviews. Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence writes "A tool that offers endpoint protection with low maintenance costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, STAXX, Cisco Threat Grid, VirusTotal and ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP), whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.