We performed a comparison between Microsoft Bitlocker and Symantec Endpoint Encryption based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison of Results: Based on the parameters we compared, Microsoft Bitlocker seems to be a superior solution. All other things being more or less equal, half of Symantec Endpoint Encryption reviewers found Symantec Endpoint Encryption to be difficult to deploy. Additionally, users of Symantec Endpoint Encryption find it difficult to upgrade. Finally, Symantec Endpoint Encryption’s users are not impressed with its technical support.
"It is easy to use and administer."
"Integration with System Center Configuration Manager (C: and D: logical drives are encrypted before installing Windows via SCCM)."
"Microsoft BitLocker can be used to ensure that stolen PCs or laptops do not lose their data."
"Microsoft BitLocker's most valuable feature is endpoint encryption, and it's quite easy to manage."
"As a Microsoft shop, we find this product easy to use."
"It is easy to use. It is usually easy to recover someone's privacy. The manageability is much easier than McAfee. I think that Microsoft is a leader in this area. We are in the Microsoft school so our judgment of McAfee will be a little bit unfair as we recommend Microsoft all the time because of the easy manageability and support. I think that McAfee is designed for a different customer and every time we open a ticket with their support, it takes a very, very long time. The main difference is just the manageability and support. In terms of the solution itself or the functionality, I know that McAfee is very strong, but manageability and support, for us, is much more important. It's strengthens the solution for us."
"It is free and native to the OS. We don't have to worry about upgrades or maintaining the product. You encrypt the disk, and you save the recovery key. That's it. The person puts their password in, and after that, it is up to them. If they forget their password, they have to bring it in to get it unlocked."
"One significant aspect is that without the BitLocker key, you can't log in to the user's laptop. I appreciate the capability to encrypt the user's hard drive, ensuring access only with the recovery key. In an enterprise setup, we store all BitLocker keys on our server. So, whenever a user attempts to log in, the architecture authenticates with the key. This ensures that our data is secure. Even if the user's laptop is lost, we have confidence that the data remains inaccessible. So far, our user data is well-protected."
"We find the dashboard, endpoint mobile encryption, and email encryption valuable."
"I like the solution for its encryption."
"The management console gives us the ability to quickly control who sees what, ensures we are on the latest version, and up-to-date."
"The installation process is pretty straightforward."
"Its management is good, and it is also scalable and mostly stable."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The solution is pretty stable."
"The encryption feature is very good."
"The solution could be improved if it was more user friendly."
"The migration itself is a nightmare."
"The management of the product could be made a little easier."
"I would like to be able to encrypt our cloud tenancy."
"The implementation of BitLocker is not simple. There are many prerequisites and hours of study and testing."
"The solution needs to have better protection and improve its pricing."
"The integration between Active Directory and BitLocker could be better."
"For improvement, as it is now, I do not have any support from anyone. There should be a web interface to manage BitLocker. But for now, all I do is just install a new product on the user's machine and create it. I would like to be able to see everything that is happening, even if it is just through a web interface. I would also like to be able to see how many users are provisioned, which users are using BitLocker, and how to disable or enable it. That's what I would like to see."
"They have too high of a price tag. That's why they're losing the market share."
"The agent can be improved on the solution. Right now, we have an Endpoint Protection agent as well as an encryption agent and another for the DLVs and other services. We would prefer a single agent for the entire product."
"More features need to be included in the encryption software."
"It's difficult to integrate the solution with the DLP"
"I think that they should improve the on-premises version to include the manageability and simplicity that is available on the cloud."
"One feature that is lacking is integration with Symantec Information Centric (ICT). As it is now, I don't see how to integrate the encryption with ICT, and in my opinion this is an area that certainly requires encryption, even though it's no longer supported by Broadcom."
"The solution does not have endpoint control."
"It was hard to install and took us about three months."
Microsoft BitLocker is ranked 1st in Endpoint Encryption with 61 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is ranked 7th in Endpoint Encryption with 34 reviews. Microsoft BitLocker is rated 8.2, while Symantec Endpoint Encryption is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft BitLocker writes "A solution that prevents unauthorized access and goes beyond security measures to provide protection to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Encryption writes "Provides a centralized management console and a straightforward initial setup process ". Microsoft BitLocker is most compared with ESET Endpoint Encryption, McAfee Complete Data Protection, Trend Micro Endpoint Encryption, WinMagic SecureDoc and Sophos SafeGuard, whereas Symantec Endpoint Encryption is most compared with McAfee Complete Data Protection, Cisco Secure Endpoint, Digital Guardian, WinMagic SecureDoc and ESET Endpoint Encryption. See our Microsoft BitLocker vs. Symantec Endpoint Encryption report.
See our list of best Endpoint Encryption vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Encryption 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.