We performed a comparison between Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade and Microsoft BitLocker based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Encryption solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."They have Disc Encryption, Anti-Malware, and a VPN Blade which is beneficial for us."
"It has addressed storage and data transfer demands efficiently."
"This software has helped individuals in the organization avoid data loss."
"End-to-end encryption provides full disk encryption, ensuring that all data on the device, including the operating system."
"Encryption prevents data loss which can cost the organization a lot of resources."
"It is a cross-platform tool."
"Its ability to provide a security layer of encryption that allows us to prevent unauthorized access to computers."
"The encryption ensures each of our drives is not invasive and that the user does not have a bad experience even while the drive is being encrypted."
"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."
"The solution works the way it's supposed to - stability and scalability are fine."
"You can do a silent remote deployment very fast."
"BitLocker is completely stable."
"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."
"I like BitLocker because it gives us strong encryption to protect our data."
"Microsoft BitLocker's most valuable features are stability and simplicity in terms of usage."
"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."
"They should improve the interface and make it a little more user-friendly."
"Regarding the general topic of support, many have annoyances with it."
"The response time for technical support could be faster."
"The tool is too expensive to be an add-on to the main solution. They could launch it independently so that costs can be lowered."
"I would like to bring centralized management to mobile devices."
"The encryption is fast; however, when it comes to generating decryption of the OS disks, it is sometimes very slow, generating a loss of time."
"The price is high for small scale business enterprises."
"There are a few cases of security breaches when the networking system fails and can lead to malware attacks. The next release should focus more on data virtualization and support for all computing devices."
"The encryption takes a long time to complete, and our system runs very slowly while it is encrypting."
"The solution lacks the ability to allow its user to provide limited access to someone."
"The visualization could be better."
"The integration between Active Directory and BitLocker could be better."
"User profiles can be improved so that people can create their own passwords. It has one password per machine, which is a problem. We would prefer each user to have his or her own boot password. Each user can have a username and password or biometrics, such as fingerprints and iris scanner, integrated into the boot process, but I really can't see that coming anytime soon, if ever."
"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."
"In future releases, I would like to see a feature where I can have a view of each device that has BitLocker to see if these machines are encrypted or not. So, I just want a view or a dashboard that can tell us so that I can remediate and add BitLocker to those systems or devices."
"I would like to be able to encrypt our cloud tenancy."
More Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade Pricing and Cost Advice →
Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade is ranked 3rd in Endpoint Encryption with 16 reviews while Microsoft BitLocker is ranked 1st in Endpoint Encryption with 58 reviews. Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade is rated 8.6, while Microsoft BitLocker is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade writes "Good encryption with a helpful central management console and excellent reliability". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft BitLocker writes "User-friendly, easy to set up, and offers real-time machine status updates". Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade is most compared with Cisco Secure Endpoint and McAfee Complete Data Protection, whereas Microsoft BitLocker is most compared with ESET Endpoint Encryption, McAfee Complete Data Protection, Symantec Endpoint Encryption, Trend Micro Endpoint Encryption and Ivanti Device Control. See our Check Point Full Disk Encryption Software Blade vs. Microsoft BitLocker report.
See our list of best Endpoint Encryption vendors and best Mobile Data Protection 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.