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. 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."
"I liked the way it works with our Microsoft tools. As we roll out Intune, we can validate if the device has been encrypted, and if not, we can push it down. It is pretty simple to deploy."
"While it helps mitigate unauthorized data access by enhancing file and system protection through encryption, the tool is really enhanced with the combination of other Microsoft Security and Compliance features like data labeling."
"There's a lot of manageability within the solution. This is very helpful."
"It is easy to implement and has AD integration."
"BitLocker is completely stable."
"Feature-wise we have the ability to encrypt fast."
"The best thing about it is the encryption type and the way it requires TPM when someone tries to access the drive."
"The solution is great for large-scale deployments."
"It is fairly stable."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I like the management aspect of this solution. You don't want to have end-users tweak or set it themselves, so the fact that you could do it from a central point helped us a lot."
"This product is a solid, all-in-one solution for enterprise data management."
"Their cloud features such as Cloud Endpoint security, ransomware modules, malware, and other modules are very effective."
"It has reduced the number of incidents related to the loss of information."
"We use it for protecting accounts, which is its most valuable feature."
"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 only thing that could be slightly improved is the occasional stability issue."
"They should offer better login capabilities that are more secure."
"The migration itself is a nightmare."
"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."
"If the encryption was faster then it would make the experience more pleasant."
"The implementation of BitLocker is not simple. There are many prerequisites and hours of study and testing."
"BitLocker should be available on standard Windows. We need to spend money on a Pro license to get BitLocker because it's essential to protect our customers' data. We don't want that to fall into the wrong hands."
"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 product can be expensive. Price was a factor in moving away from the product."
"More features need to be included in the encryption software."
"We would like some advanced security protection features."
"The instability of the company and lack of presence in the Middle East is affecting product use."
"What I didn't find helpful in the version we used is the fact that all devices had to be on the same network for us to push through the encryption."
"The security could be improved."
"It's difficult to integrate the solution with the DLP"
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.