Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. Trend Micro OfficeScan

As of June 2019, Palo Alto Networks Traps is ranked 8th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 8 reviews vs Trend Micro OfficeScan which is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection for Business with 5 reviews. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Traps writes "Its multi-layer approach helps my organization with anti-malware, exploit protection, and restrictions". The top reviewer of Trend Micro OfficeScan writes "Ease of deployment and focus on AI are key features for us". Palo Alto Networks Traps is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP), Microsoft Windows Defender and Carbon Black CB Defense. Trend Micro OfficeScan is most compared with Trend Micro Deep Security, Microsoft Windows Defender and Symantec Endpoint Protection (SEP). See our Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. Trend Micro OfficeScan report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. Trend Micro OfficeScan and other solutions. Updated: June 2019.
348,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros
The one feature of Palo Alto Networks Traps that our organization finds most valuable is the App ID service.It blocks malicious files. It prevents attacks. It doesn't require many updates, it's a very light application.The most valuable features are the fact that it was running in the background and it would intercept any weird stuff, and the fact that it would send things directly to the cloud for sandboxing. It's quite practical.After deploying Traps, we saw the performance of the network improve by 65 to 70 percent.Traps is quite a stable product. Once it was properly deployed and configured, you have nothing to be worried about.If the user leaves our premises or network, Palo Alto Traps will still be on that endpoint and will still apply our policies.The multi-layered approach to the product gives you confidence that it will stop exploits, ransomware, worms, or viruses from compromising endpoints, essentially providing peace of mind.We've had a significant increase in blocking with a decrease in false positives, because it's looking at how the files work, not just a list of files that it's been told to look for.

Read more »

The ease of deployment is one of its most valuable features.The scalability is perfect.The DDAN and the sand boxing features are very good and accurate.Stability is okay.

Read more »

Cons
It automatically detects security issues. It should be able to protect our network devices while operating autonomously.Managing the product should be easier.There are some false positives. What our guys would have liked is that it would have been easier to manipulate as soon as they found a false positive that they knew was a false positive. How to do so was not obvious. Some people complained about it. The interface, the ESM, is not user-friendly.There are some default policies which sometimes affect our applications and cause them to run around. In the hotel industry, we use a different type of data versus Oracle and SQL. By default, there are some policies which stop us from running properly. Because of this, the support level is also not that strong. We have to wait to get a results.Traps doesn't work with McAfee. You need to remove McAfee to install Traps. This is very common, and its nothing that should be an issue. Some antivirus engines recognize Traps as an threat component, so maybe they need to shake hands somewhere.Previously, the endpoint would leave the environment, not being on our VPN, essentially unable to interact with the server to upload files. It was unable to retrieve new file verdicts. It was using a thing called "local analysis" to determine if something was a malicious file or not. There was no dynamic analysis.They have the worst support, as a company, that I have ever worked with, as they are difficult to get a hold of and keep on the phone. They don't know what they are talking about when you get them on the phone. They don't like to respond to messages when you send them to them. They like to "research problems" for weeks on end, then pass you off to somebody else.There is a severe gap in functionality between Windows, Linux, and Mac versions. For example all folder restriction settings are Windows only. Traps 5.0+ does not have SAML / LDAP integration.

Read more »

There is room for improvement in next-gen attacks protection.Recently, we had a malware attack and considered looking at other cloud solutions because of this breach.I am expecting an Apple featured IDLP solution with OfficeScan, where we have only IDLP. Also, the ADR functionality in our Office Scan solution would be a nice addition. Genrally, the ADR solutions are the only failed ends of the solutions we have found with Trend Micro.​It needs a consolidated manager as there are too many parts to currently manage it.​

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
The price was fine.When we first bought it, it was a bit expensive, but it was worth it. The licensing was straightforward.I did PoCs on products called Cylance and CrowdStrike. Although, I consider these products and they were also good, when it come to cost and budgetary factors, Traps has been proven to be better than the other two products. It is quite cost-effective and delivers all the entire solution which we require.It is cost-effective compared to similar solutions. It fits for the small businesses through to the big businesses.The return on investment is from the user side because we have seen the performance of it increase the delivery time of the product if we are using too many web-based and on-premise applications. In indirect ways, we saw the return of investment in terms of performance and user satisfaction increase.It is "expensive" and flexible.Traps pays for itself within the first 16 months of a three-year subscription. This is attributed to OPEX savings, as security teams spent less time trying to identify and isolate malware for analysis as a result of a reduction in malware incidents, false positives, and breach avoidance.We didn't have to pay any additional fee for the cloud instance. It just came with the renewal, which was nice.

Read more »

On a yearly basis, it's about $50,000. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.Pricing and licensing are competitive with other solutions on the market.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Endpoint Protection for Business solutions are best for your needs.
348,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
Views
19,749
Comparisons
13,265
Reviews
9
Average Words per Review
854
Avg. Rating
8.7
Views
11,860
Comparisons
7,952
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
202
Avg. Rating
6.3
Top Comparisons
Also Known As
CyveraOfficeScan
Learn
Palo Alto Networks
Trend Micro
Overview

Traps replaces legacy antivirus and secures endpoints with a multi-method prevention approach that blocks malware and exploits, both known and unknown, before they compromise endpoints such as laptops, desktops and servers.

Micro OfficeScan provides modern threat protection for anti-malware, packer variants, device control, command and control (C&C) traffic, browser exploits, behavior monitoring, web threats, census-based control, and more.
Offer
Learn more about Palo Alto Networks Traps
Learn more about Trend Micro OfficeScan
Sample Customers
CBI Health Group, University Honda, VakifBankAtma Jaya Catholic University of Indonesia, A&W Food Services of Canada, Babou, Beth Israel Deaconess Care Organization (BO), DCI Donor Services, Evalueserve, Gulftainer, Hiroshima Prefectural Government, MEDHOST
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
Mining And Metals Company25%
Media Company13%
Hospitality Company13%
Healthcare Company13%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm16%
Comms Service Provider13%
Legal Firm13%
Media Company11%
No Data Available
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks Traps vs. Trend Micro OfficeScan and other solutions. Updated: June 2019.
348,275 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection 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.

Sign Up with Email