We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"It is a very stable program."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"It is extensive in terms of providing visibility and insights into threats. It allows for research into a threat, and you can chart your progress on how you're resolving it."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"The ability to detonate a particular problem in a sandbox environment and understand what the effects are, is helpful. We're trying, for example, to determine, when people send information in, if an attachment is legitimate or not. You just have to open it. If you can do that in a secure sandbox environment, that's an invaluable feature. What you would do otherwise would be very risky and tedious."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The best feature for our customers is the ransomware feature. It is very fresh and powerful. Bitdefender also has a feature called Ransomware Vaccine. With this feature, when a file from the ransomware is encrypted Bitdefender can revert it back to the original file. It automatically decrypts the file and puts the ransom in quarantine."
"The advantage of the solution is that it has a console on the cloud and you can update the clients."
"What I have found to be valuable is after every new release of the solution there are more features. At the time that we bought Bitdefender GravityZone, it was their top solution. We went from their Enterprise version to Elite, Elite HD, Ultra, and now there is an Ultra Plus available."
"The advanced direct control on offer is excellent."
"The performance is great."
"Great protection against malware, ransomware, and any other forms of malicious software."
"The most valuable feature for me is the ability to whitelist, blacklist, and be very granular as to what I blocked, what apps I blocked, and what websites I block. I think that's probably the most valuable feature."
"The most valuable features are the solution's thorough detection and ease of use."
"I think the costing is fine compared to other products. Cost-wise you definitely get value for your money."
"The solution is stable."
"It's quite easy to install agents."
"A big advantage of McAfee Endpoint Security is the ability to manage very big environments. We are supporting environments with 200,000 to 300,000 endpoints. The ability to manage with one single console is very important for us. McAfee has phenomenally improved in terms of detection. It provides real-time detection and response with the error, Real Protect, and reputations. It is not only based on signatures but also on behavior analytics, artificial intelligence, or machine learning. We have environments that never had issues with ransomware in the last 20 years. McAfee has a very good performance in this field."
"I have found many of the features to be useful."
"The solution is reliable."
"The solution scales well."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"We have had some problems with updates not playing nice with our environment. This is important, because if there is a new version, we need to test it thoroughly before it goes into production. We cannot just say, "There's a new version. It's not going to give us any problems." With the complexity of the solution using multiple engines for multiple tasks, it can sometimes cause performance issues on our endpoints. Therefore, we need to test it before we deploy. That takes one to three days before we can be certain that the new version plays nice with our environment."
"The technical support is very slow."
"Maybe there is room for improvement in some of the automated remediation. We have other tools in place that AMP feeds into that allow for that to happen, so I look at it as one seamless solution. But if you're buying AMP all by itself, I don't know if it can remove malicious software after the fact or if it requires the other tools that we use to do some of that."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"I would like to see integration with Cisco Analytics."
"I have not had used the EDR portion of the solution to do any custom scripting to allow further advanced operations on the endpoints. From what I understand from reading the comments on reviews is that it is not particularly flexible in this regard."
"Bitfender could improve their modules on the server. For example, Bitdefender doesn't have content filters or firewall modules on the server. It would be great if it had a networking module and a content filter module at the workstations."
"The reporting is much too simple."
"For many, the problems come mostly when they start tweaking or short-cutting - particularly for patch management."
"I would like to see the capability for remote installation added, in particular for servers."
"Using this product requires quite a bit of training, which is hard to get."
"The software itself is solid. It would be better if it was more of a real-time solution, like SentinelOne. The one thing that holds me back on the SentinelOne side is that I can blacklist websites and stuff like that, but it's not as granular as Bitdefender. With Bitdefender, I feel like I have more control over what I can whitelist and blacklist."
"There is a need to work on the deployment, when it comes to deploying to Windows machines with regards to downloading the size of the package."
"The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly. There are multiple solutions and there is no clear line differentiating all of them. There is a centralized console where we manage everything but most of the administrators feel a little confused when it comes to managing multiple products from a single place."
"There are two main areas that require improvement. One is the size of the packages. Although I'll admit manageability is good, if I want to deploy, let's say just the antivirus or just the firewall, each of those package sizes are quite large. They are sometimes as big as 200MB or 250MB. When I have operations in remote areas where connectivity is always poor, it's difficult. To deploy such a package in a remote location over the internet or something like that is always challenging."
"It would be helpful if the controlling of connections coming to the PC could be done from McAfee's side so that we can block those connections."
"The solution takes up a high amount of memory and can cause the system to hang."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"While we are pleased with the endpoint solution, there should also be a separate one for the firewall."
"With McAfee, if there is a zero-day vulnerability, you have to download the patch for it from the McAfee website, then apply it to your endpoint."
"I would like this solution to do what Palo Alto traps does because I would only need to run this one product."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"We can know if something bad is potentially happening instantaneously and prevent it from happening. We can go to a device and isolate it before it infects other devices. In our environment, that's millions of dollars saved in a matter of seconds."
"There are different packages available that vary in terms of licensing fees."
"Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra is less expensive than other solutions, such as CrowdStrike. We had a really good deal because it was their year-end and they were trying to do a lot of sales that week. We bought a three-year contract from them and the cost was approximately $17 per endpoint, per year. It is was a very good price. I have spoken to other people who have purchased CrowdStrike at approximately $60 per endpoint, per year. I have no complaints about the price of this solution."
"As I am on a different model, my clients pay me on a monthly basis."
"Price-wise, we have a better licensing agreement with Bitdefender than we did with competing vendors."
"The solution is not expensive but there are cheaper options in the market. In terms of competitiveness, the price is reasonable with no other additional costs besides the licensing fees."
"We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."
"I am happy with the pricing."
"Licensing is paid yearly."
"The price of the solution is in the middle range compare to others and could be reduced. There are not any additional costs."
"The price of this product is good."
"The pricing is great and licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"There is a one-year and a three-year license available for this solution, we are currently on a three-year license."
"Since the maintenance is done by our own team, the price of the subscription should really be cheaper."
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
Bitdefender GravityZone's ENDPOINT SECURITY TOOLS intelligent security agent assesses the host machine at installation to self-configure to optimal form, and adapts its behavior according to endpoint accessibility. Security administrators allocate resources to security tasks through policies per groups of machines. They can set security tools to work on a local machine, or they can decide to rely more on Bitdefender Global Protective Network, or totally offload security to security servers.
McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection allows you to protect all of your devices with intelligent, collaborative security, in one easy-to-manage, integrated solution. Our integrated endpoint security framework helps remove redundancies, enables fast, proven performance and offers an architecture to align both current and future security investments. With a flexible choice of cloud-based or a local management console, security administrators also get true centralized management that simplifies ongoing tasks, deployment and monitoring.
Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra is ranked 8th in Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) with 13 reviews while McAfee Endpoint Security is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 37 reviews. Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra is rated 9.0, while McAfee Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra writes "Great security with excellent standard policies and extremely stable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of McAfee Endpoint Security writes "Protect your business against a wide variety of threats". Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra is most compared with SentinelOne, CrowdStrike Falcon, Sophos Intercept X, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Trend Micro Deep Security, whereas McAfee Endpoint Security is most compared with McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra vs. McAfee Endpoint Security report.
We monitor all Endpoint Detection and Response (EDR) 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.