We performed a comparison between BigFix and Trellix Endpoint Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution was relatively easy to deploy."
"Forensics is a valuable feature of Fortinet FortiEDR."
"The stability is very good."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"This has very much improved our organization by saving time to deploy thousands of endpoints to our customers."
"BigFix can manage lost devices, so you can wipe them remotely to ensure the IP doesn't get out in public. Unified endpoint security is a new perspective. I know that HCL is also collaborating with IBM, but I'm not sure if there is any cooperation between them and MaaS360 or other endpoint components."
"It has plugins development options, which are great."
"It allows for visibility into the OT, the industrial environments, that didn't exist before which is a big piece and has benefited my organization. Second, the speed at which people can patch is night and day versus SCCM scan or another similar solution."
"Prior to BigFix we used Altiris, which was distributed. We had to manage multiple servers, and duplicate the tasks that we did on each server. BigFix tremendously reduced the amount of work that we had to do on each server in a centralized manner. We could minimize the work that we had to do, and we had a lot more control over the tasks and what machines they ran on."
"It is pretty secure, and it gives extensive vulnerability features as compared to other applications. It supports multiple languages, and the security checks are pretty high as compared to other tools in the market."
"BigFix has always been easier to use when managing servers, especially when you deal with so many servers. We have 7,000. That's a lot of services to manage, and it's convenient to patch them all at once."
"DOWNLOADING-PATCHES; It has also helped to reduce network traffic when it comes to downloading patches. By only having to download the patch once to the central location and then utilizing the relay structure to then download the patch to a specific site and then everything gathering at local, it greatly reduces the bandwidth of multiple endpoints."
"The most valuable features are reporting from the ePO console and the advanced threat protection (ATP)."
"The detection is great and the solution is constantly improving."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"The solution is stable."
"Communication with all Mcafee products (also 3rd parties) by DXL infrastructure."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"It's quite easy to install agents."
"When Intel acquired McAfee they worked on the protocol so that all vendors can work on the same platform. It's a very big improvement in McAfee. All McAfee products talk to each other. Other vendor's products can join this platform as well so it makes it more powerful on the enterprise side for McAfee."
"Making the portal mobile friendly would be helpful when I am out of office."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Detections could be improved."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"I remember doing restarts a few times. So, making sure that it is rock solid from an executable perspective is important."
"I would request them to build a robots, or an easier way for integration with the other tools, like ITSM tools."
"They need better integration."
"I would like to see more emphasis on using the web console, to have the same power as the full fat client console that they do they now. It's a lighter way to log in and it would be faster for our operators to do their work. The console tends to take a long time for a large number of clients."
"I self-taught for this online, so the initial setup was a little difficult to pick up at first. I had to create a couple of testing environments and destroy them in order to learn how to use it. There was a lot of trial and error, a lot of reading of the manuals."
"BigFix can improve the way machines report back to the console. In the external relay management environment, it has become more of a hybrid environment with most of the machines not being on-site. The need of having public-facing reporting items interconnected is becoming more and more crucial. In general, the reporting could use some enhancement."
"To make it a ten they should improve the licensing. Second, if they could have one environment for everything it would be nice. For you to install compliance you need to install the server, and then you add the modules. For you to install inventory you install the server and then you add the modules. It's not easy to do. When I was doing it before I learned it, it was not straight forward."
"I would like to see improvements in the Web UI program and also a BigFix console for Mac OS."
"It can be quite complicated to learn McAfee Endpoint Security and to feel comfortable with the environment."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"The solution has problematic encryption, which needs reforming."
"The solution could provide open XDR in addition to EDR."
"I would like to have the ability to have more control over the deployment in the next release. If you have this console in the cloud, you cannot make pilot groups for deploying the agents. We only have the current group. So, as soon as you inject the software, it will go directly into production, which doesn't work for us. We need to build up pilot groups slowly. We already requested to have this feature on the cloud, and we are still waiting."
"The software download features could stand improvement."
BigFix is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 91 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 94 reviews. BigFix is rated 8.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of BigFix writes "Very stable and easy to deploy with excellent patch compliance". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". BigFix is most compared with Microsoft Intune, Microsoft Configuration Manager, Microsoft Windows Server Update Services, Tanium and Red Hat Ansible Automation Platform, whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Cisco Secure Endpoint. See our BigFix vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.