We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"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."
"If somebody has been compromised, the question always is: How has it affected other devices in the network? Cisco AMP gives you a very neat view of that."
"Integration is a key selling factor for Cisco security products. We have a Cisco Enterprise Agreement with access to Cisco Email Security, Cisco Firepower, Cisco Stealthwatch, Cisco Talos, Cisco Threat Grid, Cisco Umbrella, and also third-party solutions. This is key to our security and maximizing operations. Because we do have the Email Security appliance and it is integrated with Threat Response, we have everything tied together. Additionally, we are using the Cisco SecureX platform, as we were a beta test for that new solution. With SecureX, we are able to pull all those applications into one pane for visibility and maintenance. This greatly maximizes our security operations."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"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."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"The entirety of our network infrastructure is Cisco and the most valuable feature is the integration."
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"MVISION Endpoint is so much easier and so much simpler for the lay security personnel to handle."
"The agents are easy to deploy."
"Technical support is excellent."
"The most valuable feature is user-based policy provision."
"I have not received any complaints about the performance."
"It is scalable and stable and the initial setup is the easiest part of using the product."
"There's excellent data loss prevention to help prevent purposeful or accidental loss of data."
"The most valuable features are the vulnerability protection and virtual patching."
"We have found the reports to be most valuable."
"This is a very stable product and we plan to continue using it."
"The solution offers good community support."
"The general anti-virus on offer is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The most valuable feature is that it's normal, and not for a specific server."
"I have found it beneficial when I update a policy it is implemented within a few seconds and the blocking of USB storage function."
"The one challenge that I see is the use of multiple endpoint protection platforms. For instance, we have AMP, but we also have Microsoft Windows Defender, System Center Endpoint Protection, and Microsoft Malware Protection Engine deployed. So, we have a bunch of different things that do the same thing. What winds up happening is, e.g., if I get an alert for a potential incident or malware and want to pull the file, I'll go to fetch the file to analyze it. But, one of these other programs has already gotten it, so the file has already been quarantined by another endpoint protection system. AMP doesn't realize that and the file fetch fails, then you're left wondering what's going on."
"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."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"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."
"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."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"The technical support is very slow."
"MVISION Endpoint is only compatible with Windows 10 and Windows 2016 and above. If I were using a Linux operating system, I would not be able to use MVISION Endpoint."
"Intrusion detection and intervention seem to be falling behind the competition."
"The initial setup can be a bit complicated for those unfamiliar with the product."
"Endpoint resource utilization causes high levels of instability and that is something that needs improvement."
"A policy-editing console should be added."
"I would like to see more local integration for the applications that we use."
"Trend Micro Apex One could improve by having better integration in the future."
"It would be ideal if the solution could be simplified a bit."
"We're not sure if we're going to continue with those products or their products or we're going to switch to something else. That's why we stopped the immigration process. If we were going to replace another product, it's not really efficient to waste time on it moving patients and other clients."
"The support could be more customer-friendly, although my experience with them has been okay."
"The solution could use signatureless detection."
"Could channel video more efficiently."
"I would like to see better reporting."
"Some of the updates still require a complete reboot of the system."
"There is also the Cisco annual subscription plus my management time in terms of what I do with the Cisco product. I spend a minimal amount of time on it though, just rolling out updates as they need them and monitoring the console a couple of times a day to ensure nothing is out of control. Cost-wise, we are quite happy with it."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"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 pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"The pricing is mid-ranged and quite reasonable compared to other similar products."
"It is based on an annual subscription."
"Licensing fees are billed on a yearly basis."
"MVISION is intended as an enterprise product and it is priced like one. This solution is within the price range of competitors at the enterprise level."
"Customers would need to purchase a license. If a customer purchases an MVISION Endpoint license, he may use that license to install ENS. It's a flexible license where you have the option to either use the McAfee security software or the Windows Defender managed by McAfee, which is MVISION Endpoint."
"Its pricing should be improved."
"The cost of this solution is mid-level; not cheap nor expensive."
"The price for Trend Micro is reasonable."
"Trend Micro has very aggressive pricing, but it is also very good."
"Compared to other products on the market, I think that the pricing is reasonable."
"When compared with other solutions, the price could be better."
"The price is reasonable."
"It has a per-user license."
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.
McAfee MVISION Endpoint delivers enhanced detection and correction capabilities to augment native Microsoft Windows security controls, which are always up to date. Machine learning, credential theft monitoring, and rollback remediation boost the basic security built into the Windows and effectively combat advanced, zero-day threats.
Trend Micro Apex One™ protection offers advanced automated threat detection and response against an ever-growing variety of threats, including fileless and ransomware. Our cross-generational blend of modern techniques provides highly tuned endpoint protection that maximizes performance and effectiveness.
McAfee MVISION Endpoint is ranked 22nd in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 6 reviews while Trend Micro Apex One is ranked 12th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 44 reviews. McAfee MVISION Endpoint is rated 8.0, while Trend Micro Apex One is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of McAfee MVISION Endpoint writes "This recognized brand has been reliable in the past but seems to be losing ground to competition". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trend Micro Apex One writes "Antivirus and Malware scanning with reporting that allows you to report back with information". McAfee MVISION Endpoint is most compared with McAfee Endpoint Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Sophos Intercept X, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra, whereas Trend Micro Apex One is most compared with Trend Micro Deep Security, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, CrowdStrike Falcon and Symantec End-User Endpoint Security. See our McAfee MVISION Endpoint vs. Trend Micro Apex One report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (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.