Anonymous UserSecurity Officer at a healthcare company
Anonymous UserInformation Technology Manager at a energy/utilities company
MicroAdmin677Microsoft Enterprise administrator at a comms service provider
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"It is a very stable program."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"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."
"Using dashboards, it is very easy to manage."
"The security is very good, compared to some other products."
"Endpoint Security's most valuable feature is its heuristic analysis. This heuristic approach means that it learns from its past experiences. It is the most valuable feature they have. This contributes to dealing with ransomware, detection, and early mitigation actions."
"They have a very good reporting system and they have a very good dashboard for the administrator, which makes monitoring everything easy."
"It's excellent at detecting viruses."
"It has a very good firewall, which lets you isolate your devices depending on the groups."
"The interface is really good. It's nice and simple."
"Ability to specify the level of protection on devices,"
"It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows."
"Within its class I think, it has a high and decent detection rate."
"It's really stable. I've used a lot of stuff, a lot of products, like ESET and Kaspersky. None of them are comparable with this one. This one is much better."
"This is a very go, proactive solution to threat protection using advanced analysis."
"I like the real-time protection features. Windows Defender will detect if there's a threat like a Trojan or something like that but Kaspersky lets it run normally."
"Defender is integrated into the operating system. It's integrated with everything. You don't have to spend time analyzing what you have to do to be sure that the integration is okay between the security tool and all the other apps. This, from my point of view, is the main advantage."
"The most valuable features are that it's easy to use and the updates are very simple."
"The most valuable feature is that we can use the solution right out of the box without too much configuration."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The technical support is very slow."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"I would like to see the inclusion of support for device management and device control."
"I would like to see enhancements made with respect to the administration."
"A big improvement would be allowing us to reconfigure the agents and change what to whitelist for a specific user. If the user is not happy with the configuration and is being blocked from certain sites, we should be able to reconfigure the monitoring mechanics to make it more flexible."
"The solution needs to lower its pricing."
"The initial setup is complex."
"he next thing that I would like to see in this solution are DLP features."
"The performance of our machines tended to slow down under Kaspersky. That definitely needs to be addressed. I remember I had a pretty good Dell Notebook, and this product slowed it down quite a bit."
"The process for upgrades is very slow."
"Microsoft Windows Defender doesn't have a game mode."
"There's a lot of manual effort involved to configure what we need."
"The end-user also cannot do some advanced actions on it. It's a little bit complicated for our end-user, so it needs to be simplified."
"Updates are not coming out of preview quickly enough and it is holding back on the development of the product."
"The system can always be simplified and have a better integration check. More detailed reports would be good. When it does the integrated check, it just shows if the system is okay but I want to know what happened."
"The solution needs to improve its ransomware. It's not so good. It could also use some general performance optimization for the computers the solution operates on, to ensure it does not slow down the devices."
"I would like to be able to set up any kind of protection I want in the firewall, any IP address or any number."
"There's scanning going on that occasionally topples the memory, causing everything to freeze. This should be fixed."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"The price is very good."
"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."
"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."
"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 Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"For 300 nodes, we pay about 15,000 Malaysian Ringgit ($3,500 USD)."
"Kaspersky is priced well."
"Licensing costs are on a yearly basis."
"It's an affordable security solution."
"Its price is on par with other products. It might even be slightly cheaper. There are no additional costs."
"We have been using a yearly subscription and feel that pricing could be better. Perhaps, discounts could be given, during the renewal process, to those who have been customers for some time."
"I find the solution to be inexpensive compared to other solution like Crowdstrike."
"The product is free of charge and comes integrated into Windows."
"The solution is free."
"This product is included in the pricing for Windows."
"It is affordable and comes in the Office 365 bundle."
"I pay for it through the Windows Professional or Standard license. It is a one-time cost for me, and I use the same license."
"This solution is part of Windows and comes included with it."
"I got it with the Microsoft Windows license."
"The solution is an open source version and was free with a paid version of Windows 10."
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.
Kaspersky Endpoint Security is ranked 10th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 27 reviews while Microsoft Defender Antivirus is ranked 1st in Anti-Malware Tools with 28 reviews. Kaspersky Endpoint Security is rated 8.2, while Microsoft Defender Antivirus is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Kaspersky Endpoint Security writes "A mature product offering good protection and very good features". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender Antivirus writes "A security implementation that supplies proactive issue resolution with cloud analytics and APT". Kaspersky Endpoint Security is most compared with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra, Sophos Intercept X, ESET Endpoint Security and SentinelOne, whereas Microsoft Defender Antivirus is most compared with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security, CrowdStrike Falcon, ESET Endpoint Security, Carbon Black CB Defense and Trend Micro Apex One. See our Kaspersky Endpoint Security vs. Microsoft Defender Antivirus report.
See our list of .
We monitor all Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business 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.