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.
"The tool has improved the starting up of our notebooks and end-user devices."
"BitLocker is completely stable."
"It holds significant value as it reduces the need for extensive IT management to handle security across networks and environments"
"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."
"It is an encryption tool and provides security."
"The initial setup is very simple."
"The ease of administering and integrating the solution is great."
"I like BitLocker because it gives us strong encryption to protect our data."
"The initial setup was easy."
"The most valuable feature is that it works in the background so that the end-users are not aware of what is happening on the laptop."
"The best feature of Symantec Endpoint Encryption is the encryption itself. Encryption truly is the way to go because nowadays we are living in an era of widespread server threats, and you need to encrypt your emails and documents because you never know who might get hold of them."
"In general terms, it is working properly and according to our expectations. The comfort of feeling secure is the most valuable. Some customers had certain fears about changing the product because no one wants to lose any kind of information or to have some problems or inconsistencies while migrating from one product to another."
"We can extend it to all of the critical endpoints and the servers, and we can ensure the confidentiality of the data."
"This product is a solid, all-in-one solution for enterprise data management."
"We have been very satisfied with the solution's security capabilities."
"It is fairly stable."
"The management of the product could be made a little easier."
"I would like to be able to encrypt our cloud tenancy."
"It's possible that the time it takes to pull items in to BitLocker could be reduced a bit."
"There is room for improvement in stability."
"Microsoft BitLocker needs to be an all-inclusive solution. For example, a Trusted Platform Module (TPM) cryptoprocessor is required to use Bitlocker with your computer which keeps Bitlocker from adoption beyond Windows."
"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."
"The biggest one for us is revoking access. So, even though someone downloads something to a device, we want the ability to cloak that device or data and bring it back or make that data unusable for that person. Currently, BitLocker doesn't give us that ability. It basically encrypts it. We're seeing if identity management or IAM allows us to do that. We're kind of looking at third-party software that does that for us."
"The solution could improve by having a centralized GUI for management."
"The UI could be improved."
"We would like some advanced security protection features."
"The product can be expensive. Price was a factor in moving away from the product."
"The security could be improved."
"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."
"The GUI could use some enhancement, particularly in making option sets easier to locate on client machines."
"Its decryption time needs to be improved. Currently, its decryption time is very long, and it takes double time than encryption. They need to work on that. Its encryption time is fine."
"I can only patch monthly. I don't know what the solution is there, besides being vulnerable for three weeks out of four. But there's got to be an option somehow."
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 "User-friendly, easy to set up, and offers real-time machine status updates". 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.