We performed a comparison between Microsoft Purview eDiscovery and OpenText EnCase eDiscovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Google, Commvault, Microsoft and others in eDiscovery."I think eDiscovery Premium has made dealing with data from Teams much more accessible than any other platform."
"The machine learning wasn't half bad. I really like that part. I thought it was novel. It pretty much automated it, once you trained the model."
"The tool has been beneficial. Some of our previous users left the organization without sharing the information they had at a personal level. This information was related to the organization, and they didn't disclose it. Thanks to the product, it's easy for me to search and find out what communication a specific user has done, whether it's from SharePoint or any other platform. With Microsoft Purview eDiscovery, we can easily retrieve and restore this data."
"Data Recovery: Its ability to repair damaged partitions and uncover hidden partitions from within the tool, and allow further analysis."
"The solution is very stable."
"The technical support is excellent."
"I like the processing feature on the product because it does everything at once, i.e, indexing, recovery, keyword searches, etc."
"It indexes much faster, and is more reflexive because of the Enscripts."
"It speeds up the process, so I can meet my deadlines."
"The most important feature we've found is the Enscripts. That is one powerful feature that I, personally, love to use."
"I see two significant challenges with many of my clients. One is that there are some functionality gaps compared to specialized tools in the legal industry, like a legal hold tool or a document review tool. They have features that Purview eDiscovery lacks. Those gaps create a situation where I almost have to do things twice. I need to collect all my data in eDiscovery and ship it to another platform to complete the review."
"Microsoft Purview eDiscovery should be cheaper."
"Purview eDiscovery works, but it's not entirely perfect. There were times when search results would get hung up or error codes would be presented and we'd have to contact Microsoft to get that sorted out."
"The reporting is a bit unreliable. It needs to be better."
"Sometimes the application can take more time to complete the image processing or fail at the end of the process."
"We have come across problems with the end-case. We could not find an email discovery type of module and there was not flexibility with the email."
"Ease of use and learning curve need improvement."
"In the past, incident response time for tech support was slow."
"There were minor UI bugs."
"I would like to see a capability to ingest and absorb more data. That would be really good. It currently is lacking this function."
Microsoft Purview eDiscovery is ranked 3rd in eDiscovery with 3 reviews while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is ranked 6th in eDiscovery with 8 reviews. Microsoft Purview eDiscovery is rated 7.0, while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Microsoft Purview eDiscovery writes "It has improved visibility and simplified data review, but it lacks many features found in specialized tools". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText EnCase eDiscovery writes "A stable and scalable hybrid solution with easy setup". Microsoft Purview eDiscovery is most compared with Google Vault, Microsoft Purview, Veritas Enterprise Vault.cloud, Varonis Platform and Microsoft Sentinel, whereas OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is most compared with Nuix eDiscovery, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and kCura Relativity.
See our list of best eDiscovery vendors.
We monitor all eDiscovery 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.
