There are certain engagements where our customers are still using it. Now, however, we do see a common trend of people moving towards Defender service rather than using McAfee.

We also use Trend Micro. We would prefer Trend Micro and would rate Trend Micro top and then make McAfee next.

I have experience with Trend Micro, Sophos, and McAfee.

The main difference is their single solution. There's one single pane of glass you're looking at which gets easier with the maintenance. The utilization is also great. It takes away the customer of having to deal with problems with the utilization. There's a balance between the performance of the agent as well as the operation of the client. You won't hear a client complaining that a McAfee solution.

The threat intelligence with respect to endpoint security is great too. With the threat intelligence and McAfee having been in the industry for so long, it has a better capability of protecting our endpoints.

I also used Kaspersky. I used it for two years and then replaced it with McAfee. 

We previously used the on-premise version of McAfee MVISION Endpoint. It was very similar. However, we switched so we did not have to manage the server ourselves.

I've also used Check Point. 

I'm also familiar with Cylance and CrowdStrike, which I've used at a different company.

I have previously used Check Point and Microsoft Defender. I would recommend Microsoft Defender over the other solutions I have used.

I have experience with Microsoft Defender, AVG, and Norton.

Currently, I work with CrowdStrike since my company has a partnership with it. CrowdStrike is better than Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS). CrowdStrike offers functionalities like machine learning and DLP.

We previously used Trend Micro. When we were deploying Trend Micro, we faced a lot of difficulties. When we acquired Trend Micro, we had no endpoint security so we had to remove an endpoint and deploy Trend Micro. As a result, deploying Trend Micro was very painful. There were frequent failures in the automatic script that Trend Micro had provided, and it took us about three and a half months to completely cover around 4,000 devices. At the same time, McAfee's deployment was seamless. There might have been an issue, but those issues never escalated. With Trend Micro, the issues escalated frequently.

We switched because of the distinction in scalability, Bluetooth and support. Additionally, one of the reasons we replaced Trend Micro was that we were raising a support ticket every month, which was embarrassing for us. We were losing five to seven tags. PSEs and the response to those PSEs were not satisfied every time.

I have previously used Symantec at a different company. I think Symantec is the best solution overall. 

We did use another solution prior to this, but because we have the entire FireEye suite, we decided to create a more monolithic approach to security using different products. These include FireEye EX and FireEye AX, which are used for malware protection, network protection, and sandboxing. We decided that if these were good enough then we would push more for the endpoints, which is why we adopted this solution.

We are using Cisco Umbrella, as well as McAfee.

We were using McAfee AV. We switched to FireEye Endpoint Security because we had some performance issues with McAfee AV. We are not facing those issues with FireEye Endpoint Security.

Before FireEye, we used McAfee Endpoint Protection and Trend Micro.

We deal with endpoint solutions from several vendors including Sophos, Symantec, and CrowdStrike. We are still using Symantec in parallel with McAfee.

The capabilities of these products are similar and the real difference is in the support. McAfee has the best support nowadays, as Symantec takes too long to respond.

It was a new deployment. We previously didn't have any similar solution in that company.

We did not use a solution prior to this one.