It is easy to scale, but it depends on what your organization is. If your organization has a lot of PII and you are a large company, then you might want to look at a different type of solution. One of the reports that we got back for Malwarebytes said that it is too commercial, and it is for big businesses like law firms and stuff like that, and we should probably use something else, but that was it. Malwarebytes also had a bad report in third-party testing. This company tests a product against all these viruses in the wild, and apparently, it did pretty poorly in that.

For our purposes, we would never really run out of scale for it. These types of solutions are run to do thousands and thousands of systems. We're probably never going to hit even hundreds.

Currently, we've got at most 40 endpoints, and that's our entire organization. Its users range from owners to vice presidents to IT to final end-users.

We do not have plans to increase its usage. In fact, if anything, we have plans to either decrease usage or probably move away from it entirely based on the cost.

Scalability does not apply to Malwarebytes. 

My vision is all the endpoints are not scalable. There is nothing to be scaled in the endpoint security itself, not in not a fault of Malwarebytes. It is the same situation with the other vendors, such as Trend Micro, Kaspersky, Fortinet, and CrowdStrike, all of them on the endpoint are not scalable security solutions.

We have 50 users using this solution in my organization.

The solution is highly scalable; it's easy to purchase additional licenses, activate them in the Nebula Cloud, and roll them out to the endpoints.

We have 60 licenses; 50 are for the clients, which are Windows 10 and 11. The other 10 are for servers ranging from 2012 R2 to 2019 Windows servers.

The tool is lightweight in terms of maintenance, two admins monitor it, and both of us are capable of making any required adjustments. The solution is primarily automated, so it doesn't require much input from us.

It is a scalable solution. We can scale up the use of the solution.

My clients are usually SMBs.

Whatever licenses we have, we pay, and we use the endpoints.

I have noticed that there is some scalability. They promised they're adding new modules and it'll be straightforward to deploy them also. It will likely be more scalable in the future. 

In my company, we have more than 100 machines covered with the solution. We have just an agent, or you can say a warden, that communicates with the cloud engine.

It's considered an essential solution and therefore is constantly running. It works in the background all the time on every machine. 

The solution's scalability is very good. We can divide a company into many segments and have as many endpoints as needed.

Scalability's fine. We never ran into any issues, and we're a large company with 17,000 users. So I think that Malwarebytes can scale just fine. But that's probably due to the solution's simple nature. The more data you're pulling back, the more complex it gets, which creates a greater load on the backend systems that they're hosting. However, Malwarebytes is pretty lean right now, so performance has never really been a problem from a console perspective.

I rate Malwarebytes' scalability a ten out of ten. My company has 400 users who use it 24/7. 

I don't know much about the solution's scalability because I don't have the visibility of the services being expanded to other locations, but it should be scalable since it is a solution available over the internet.

My company has around 1,000 users of the solution.

I don't know if my company has plans to increase the use of the solution.

There isn't too much scalability. It's got its console and you see all equipment within your organization on it. It does a little bit of network checking and that kind of stuff, however, actually, it is basically just an endpoint product.

We have a small company with about 25 users that are on it right now. That's it. Most of our clients are small to medium-sized companies.

It is very scalable. We have 100% usage, and we use it for every single device.

In terms of the number of users, there are only two of us who actually interact with the solution.

The solution has a lot of scalability potential. If a company needs to expand it, it won't have a problem at all.

We found the solution to be scalable. However, our increased usage caused performance issues, and required a lot of updates to be installed.

We have close to 600 end clients, devices, and haven't had any issues with scalability. We'll extend use as needed. We were told that even with double the number of users there won't be any issues. 

For our purposes, the solution is scalable - at least in our region. It doesn't require too much reconfiguration.

In terms of scalability, whether it would be something that I would extend to an entire office full of Macs, or a whole company that was running Macs, I'm not sure. I would imagine on the basis that it doesn't have a particularly big memory or CPU footprint, that it would be ideal for scalability. You would only install it on one machine at a time, not on a server. It would be on the user's system. 

We are a small company, so it is scalable for us.

The scalability of the solution is good. A company shouldn't have issues scaling it.

It is quite easy to scale because it's a power version. Currently, we have 25 users. 

The solution scales up just fine, especially for mid-tier organizations.

In my opinion, it's not very scalable, at least the way we use it at this point in time.

This is a scalable solution.

Right now, the scalability is limited.