The solution automatically scales to our requirements and we currently have plans to scale up.

I'm still in the early stage, but the scalability seems impressive based on my research and the size of reference clients.

The solution is very scalable.

Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

It is like Microsoft Office. Its scalability is good, but I don't know how manageable it would be on a big scale. The biggest deployment I've worked on was about 5,000 endpoints, and it seemed to be okay.

The solution can scale. We scaled up initially from 500 to 32,00 endpoints and it was fine. 

The solution is scalable; we have it deployed across our entire organization to 3,000 endpoints, and 1,700 end users. 

Scalability is built into the product. It's a cloud-managed solution, so it's capable of scaling pretty quickly as needed. You don't have to unlock another key or do something else to scale the product. It's scalable by design.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint can scale effectively to meet the needs of our environment, regardless of its size.

Its scalability is very good. It definitely scales easily.

Its scalability is immense. There is no device, user, or policy limit. You install a device, and it is automatically configured because the policy is deployed from the centralized policy server or active directory.

We have around 500 devices in our organization, and all devices are using it. We have all kinds of devices such as laptops, desktops, notebooks, surface devices, etc. We also have in-house virtual servers on the AWS cloud and in-house physical servers. We also recommend enabling it for our client servers, and we configure policies for them.

Every person in our organization is using this solution. We have approximately 380 users. Its users include everyone from a new joiner to our management president. Last year, our strength was 260, and this year we have 380 users. We are growing, and by 2022, we should have more than 600 users. We are growing in a very good manner, and a group target is there. We are definitely going to grow.

It is very scalable. Because it is cloud-based, it is elastic in its nature. You can onboard machines en masse. Whether you are onboarding 15 machines or 1500 machines, it is very straightforward.

As we scale up, this is now our AV and EDR of choice. Every new machine will be rolled out or onboarded to Defender for Endpoint. We will be sticking with it in the long-term. We have also the logs and telemetry from Defender for Endpoint being ingested into our MDRC platform.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

It is incredibly scalable. However, its ability to bind things into the groups on its dashboard is limited. You can see your 50,000 machines empire, but dividing it into regions, and dividing it into subgroups and management areas is very limited.

It is deployed across the world. There are 250 sites worldwide with 50,000 devices.

We have scaled up to 3,000 endpoints, and there is scope for it to be scaled more. When more employees join or more departments come in, we'll be scaling up.

It's definitely a scalable solution. Almost all of the users in my organization, close to 70,000, use this solution.

The product can scale if a company needs it to.

There's a big number of users on the solution in our company. It's likely more than 400 users. 

There are no limitations on Defender's scalability. I get the impression that it's designed to cater to massive enterprises with 20,000 or more endpoints, but I think there's a market for a simpler deployment, like 100 PCs, 10 servers, etc. Give me a deployment option that's simple. 

The solution is easily scalable. We have ten people using the solution currently.

It is not very scalable from the eyes of an MSP. There is no dashboard that you can use to see all of your devices that have Windows Defender unless you have your own dashboard or an RMM tool to actually look at it. Because it doesn't give you one pane of glass to look at everything, you have to have an RMM tool that can actually see the data coming from Microsoft Defender. If you don't have an RMM tool, you would need one, and that would be an extra cost.

I don't really use an RMM tool. We have a SOC, and I don't really deal with individual computers themselves. In the past, I have used RMM tools, and some of them do well with looking at Microsoft Defender, but my SOC has a really good dashboard that I can use to see what's going on with Microsoft Defender. I can actually control stuff on Microsoft Defender from my SOC.

It can scale as much as you want. It installs a very low footprint on your laptop, but the management is cloud-based.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

Defender is scalable. The solution covers multiple locations and departments. We have about 100,000 end users. The departments vary in size. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easily scalable because it is compatible with a variety of Windows and Linux machines.

We have more than 5,000 users using this solution.

It's also a scalable solution.

About 90 percent of our clients have deployments in multiple locations because they are usually multi-national, and that's why it sometimes takes more time to do the implementation.

It is highly scalable. We were able to deploy it across the organization fairly quickly. It is also pretty straightforward to add users or remove users.

We use Office 365 and Azure AD. We have somewhere around 400 users dispersed across the USA.

There are no scalability constraints because it's all in the cloud. It's a SaaS. So, they can take on more PCs than any Fortune 500 would even have. The only constraint is that in terms of scaling, the strength of the platform is highly influenced by the OS version. If you were largely using Windows XP and Server 2003, you would not want to choose Microsoft Defender as your suite.

Scalability and deployment always depend on how many of your clients are online. There is no problem with the scalability and deployments of servers because they are online 24/7, but client management is different than server management. We are located in 13 countries, and we have about 9,000 clients. Of course, they are not always online because of which you're always struggling with your client management. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a scalable solution. We have around 3,000 total endpoint devices with two administrators, and we have plans to increase the usage.

We've deployed the solution in small environments and larger ones. So we haven't had any issues going between the two. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

The scalability is there, and there's always room for improvement. I need to incorporate more outliers, but the solution is easy enough to deploy that I can quickly onboard many workstations or servers. The product is an eight out of ten in terms of scalability.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

It's highly scalable considering it's a SaaS solution.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a cloud solution, so it's always scalable.

It's also scalable.

It is very scalable. We hope to increase the usage of the product. It is being used only by our team for now at multiple locations. It is for laptops in the office and other networks and also for mobile devices. A few tech guys in our department are testing everything that could happen on the client side, and that's it.

The product can scale well.

Around 15 people are using it in our organization. 

We may increase it in the future. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

It is also scalable. 

Since it's an AV and EDR, you can use it at any location and on all the platforms, including Android and iOS.

It's very easy to scale because it comes built-in with Windows 10, and you just need to enable it. This can be done on scale using group policies or through Endpoint Manager on cloud or Intune.

We have about 5,000 users.

It is the most scalable solution around. You can create an Azure tenant, and with a script, you can deploy 1,000 user accounts. There is no actual limit to it, so the scalability is infinite.

The scalability is pretty good. It's easy to scale it.

I have different locations here in Mexico, with about 300 users here and two or three in the UK, depending on the travel schedule.

The scalability is amazing. Using Azure, the sky is the limit. You just need to understand the business case.

In some cases our clients have small environments, but in other cases they have big environments. Large clients may have 1,000 agents running. But as a consulting company, we work with many types of businesses and many environments of different sizes.

As I mentioned, if the client requests an integration with some third-party tool, we may need to use another tool or develop something to make this possible. But in most cases, you don't need to do so. You just activate it and check if your policy will apply or has already been applied to the server.

Scalability is one thing which, I think, Microsoft is working on, because it is not yet very scalable. What it provides out-of-the-box is all it has. Any big organization needs customization, but the customization of it and running customized things on top of it are areas where it is lagging. That something Microsoft needs to work on. Examples include running custom playbooks or customizing the events which it is collecting.

We are protecting 100,000 endpoints with this solution. We may increase usage, but there is no plan for that as of yet.

We have had no issues with scalability. We deploy it anywhere from a small environment with a hundred users, to a large environment with 15,000 to 20,000 endpoints. The majority of our clients are small to medium-sized, with 3,000 to 4,000 users in the mid-range.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is as scalable as any other cloud-based EDR solution. I would give the scalability a nine out of ten.

It is scalable.

The solution is very scalable. Microsoft makes that easy, and we plan to increase our Defender for Endpoint usage.

The scalability is impressive, especially since we use it in the cloud. It works seamlessly without any issues.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint proved to be scalable in our environment, supporting over 500 endpoints.

It is easy to scale and increase capacity.

We are at one location with multiple departments such as IT, marketing, sales, invoicing, etc. We are a small company and have 53 users of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

In terms of scalability, we went from 10 pilot machines to 35,000 devices.

The scalability has been great. If you need to expand, you can.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to expand it, it can.

We have 1,000 to 2,000 people on the solution currently.

The solution is scalable. For example, I helped a 12,000-person company put it in and automated it without any issue.

I let my outsource company handle scalability. I only get involved if there are issues.

We have 50-plus servers with around 125 to 150 endpoints.

Our organization has thousands of people using the solution.

Defender scales well. 

It is scalable. We use it for multiple departments, teams, and locations. We have over 5,000 users.

We have it deployed across various departments. The IT users have more privileged settings.

It was definitely scalable. In my previous organization, we enrolled more than 20,000 endpoints.

Scalability-wise, considering the integration that they have, it's good. For example, it can be integrated with Azure Sentinel. We have two or three people who work with managing and deploying this product.

We deploy across Qatar and currently have about 68,000 endpoints protected with Defender. Our usage will increase based on the number of clients we have that buy the product. Ultimately, it depends on the licensing model.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been scalable.

We have more than 200 users using this solution in my organization.

Its scalability is good enough. As long as you deploy the OS, you will keep on deploying Microsoft Defender automatically. This is a good option.

We have about 375 endpoints.

The tool's scalability is good, but we must consider the cost. 

It is scalable.

We have the solution deployed to around 350 users across four different locations.

It can scale to the thousands and thousands. I have seen customers here, some have approximately 12,000 devices and they're running that one program and it's going far without any issues. 

The scalability is totally based on your OS operating system as it's a part of the OS. You can't define it in a different way. If your Windows platform is working fine and is of a certain size, then you can say that it's quite good and it will cover that.

We have 200 to 300 people using the solution. Some of our employees use Windows and have Defender. Others use Mac devices. 

In terms of scalability, we have run into organizations that are very large and that have said it doesn't scale well. I'm part of MISA, the Microsoft Intelligence Security Association, and we did a review of all their products and they all had scaling problems, including SIEM/SOAR, MCAS, Endpoint Manager, et cetera.

There are two "fronts" for anybody who is using a SIEM/SOAR: one is how fast they can ingest, and the other one is how fast they can make decisions. You want to do this in real-time, or near real-time.

The ingestion problem is that you're ingesting a bunch of stuff from everywhere: from the network, from identity, from all your services, and your apps. It's a crazy amount of data. Some organizations are doing on the order of 5 billion events daily. How do you ingest all that in a timely manner and correlate it? You have to do it in a distributed way. There will be a top-level SIEM/SOAR and several underneath it that are collecting data for a particular location or a set of users. You trim that down and eventually ingest stuff to the top so that you can see things from the holistic viewpoint. Or you decentralize it, where office A and all its users have their own, and office B has its own, and you don't necessarily roll it up into a single, corporate-wide solution.

There are products out there that are addressing this by not storing the events directly onto disk, but into flash drives, so they're super-fast. They never put it on a disk and save it. You can have the option of saving it to disk for long-term retention. But the immediate ingestion of events is happening through flash drives. It sits in fast memory, never gets written to disks, and that's how they're speeding things up. And there are AI/ML engines pulling that stuff in and they can act much faster.

In addition, some AI/ML engines are more mature than others. There is a lot of work being done on that front. When it comes to Endpoint Manager there are a bunch of events coming from a ton of endpoints. It's no different than ingesting events from a thousand database servers. Or they could be from your whole application reference architectures, and your data analytics reference architectures. Everybody sees the problem coming, the problem of big data. That's what we are really talking about. There is a whole lot of stuff coming in and we have to make sense of it, figure out what's relevant, have a scoring system and prioritization system to make decisions fast. For example, the bad guys are able to get into your systems and, within 20 minutes, they've already done an assessment. Usually, if you're lucky, you can respond to that in 30 minutes. And if you're a huge enterprise, you may not even be able to respond that fast.

That's the reason everybody says it's not a fair fight. We don't have the tools right now to react fast enough.

As for how extensively it's being used by our clients, anyone who is going to use it plans to use it as a one-stop solution. They won't be using multiple solutions and they will roll it out to every endpoint. It makes perfect sense to do so because you don't want to have multiple products and require your staff to have knowledge of multiple products.

For big corporations, it takes a little while to get there. It's something that has been evolving for 30 years now. Organizations want to settle on a standard desktop and want to be able to do configuration control that allows them to control the apps and the usability from a security standpoint. It used to be, "Let's make it easily usable." But now the industry is flipping that over to, "It has to be secure." The vendors have finally come to the point where the balance between usability and security is leveling out.

The scalability is okay. 

I have found Microsoft Defender for Endpoint to be scalable.

We have approximately 700 people using this solution and we plan to increase usage.

I can't add more layers of security because of my budget and business plan, so I try to choose the best and most preferable option for me and my company.

I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten.

In one company, we have two administrators and 30 employees who use this solution.

On a short-term plan, I will not increase the usage. On a larger scale, we intend to increase the license.

It is easy to scale.

We have around 80,000 users.

The company that I implemented this for has approximately 2,000 staff and 1,000 virtual machines on Azure. 

It has good scalability. We are happy with it and plan to increase its usage. We currently have around 20 users.

It's very scalable. We have deployed it only to 250 endpoints for now. It's not enterprise-wide. We have plans to increase its usage.

The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been good.

We have approximately five clients using the solution. We have thousands of licensees for this solution within my company.

Currently, we have about 2,000 users.

We are only running it on a few workstations. The scalability is okay.

It's run on 10 out of 3,000 workstations and we plan to continue using it.

We have no more than 10 users in our organization.

It is highly scalable. We have around 5,000 users. I would rate it a ten out of ten in terms of scalability.

Scalability is fine. I mainly work with implementation, so I haven't really had to mess around with the scalability. I'm responsible for setting up security policies, and then if they want to do scalability, that's another team. I sit in security.

Microsoft Defender is very scalable and there is a lot of room to expand and add extra layers. We have 2,500 endpoints and we plan to expand; however, we are thinking about using the Microsoft Endpoint Manager in place of it.

Once the decision is made to stay with this product or instead adopt Endpoint Manager, we will expand to cover 6,000 endpoints.

The scalability of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint has been fine.

It is pretty easy to scale. it was basically one click to agree that you wanted to use it.

Microsoft is actively working on this product and I think that it is becoming more scalable, day by day. For example, prior to Windows 10, there was no ransomware support. Now, it comes with Windows 20S2 and Windows 20H1.

With our decentralized environment, I don't know the exact number of users or devices that we have. However, I can say that there are more than 500 devices being protected by this solution.

Most of the machines in our environment are in areas that don't have internet access. This is because they are stationed in remote areas of the country. This means that we need to use USB drives to update the machines manually. Given the number of devices and that the management is done manually at this time, it is pretty painful for our IT people.

I give the scalability a ten out of ten.

The solution is scalable. 

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable. It's the ground-level service for other Microsoft security services. Microsoft provides a full range of security services and you have the ability to extend it anytime and in a simple way. You can scale the range of security services by just buying the license and implementing some extra service.

We have close to 200 users in our organization, but we plan to deploy this product to the whole company, with a total of nearly 800 people.

Our company is only a small company. We only have 10 people who use the solution. However, we have clients who have a lot of users. 

We likely will increase usage in the future. 

The solution is highly scalable.

You can onboard as many end systems as you want. If you bring more, for example, 100 users or 100 endpoints, you can integrate them with no issue. It's not a problem with MDATP.

We have somewhere around 2,000 to 3,000 users who are using it. We have an endpoint team and they manage the antiviruses and security tools and all those things. We manage the product partially from a policies perspective, and the endpoint team manages the platform and maintenance of it, including any upgrades, as necessary.

The scalability is fine. We had more than 300 devices that are being protected.

We have approximately 7,000 machines and we have not needed to scale beyond our original implementation.

It's pretty easy to scale.

A handful of people with each in charge of different areas are involved in the maintenance of the solution. It's people in system admin.

We are not using it widely because of the licensing limits.

We have three users only for Defender ATP, and if we are using the Microsoft ATA it applies to 500 users.

The scalability in general is quite good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

Today, we have dozens of clients using the solution and we're expecting to add more. This is our target - to increase the number of customers using the solution.

It scales easily.

The solution is scalable.

Scalability is not a problem because we don't have servers. We don't do anything more with the computers than use them for studies, reading papers and books, watching movies, and communicating with our family. So, we don't need to scale up.

I find the solution to be quite easily extended into other environments. It is scalable, I have it on three devices. 

I have found the scalability quite good.

In terms of scalability, we have not encountered any issues. We have around 7,000 end points.

We don't have too many physical people dealing with the solution. We have some people in operations and then some architects and so on, however, they are not involved on a day-to-day basis.

To scale the solution, I think you need more licenses but I'm not sure. We have 100 to 1,000 users. We just use it for some end users, not for all the users. The users are mainly end-users and a few admins. We plan to increase users annually.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is definitely scalable.

It is scalable.

There is no need to get an additional solution because it comes bundled with Windows. 

We are protecting around 60 to 70 endpoints in India. In the entire company, there may be around 400 to 500.

I have found the scalability of the solution good.

Microsoft Defender Antivirus could be more scalable. 

Microsoft Defender ATP is scalable at any point of time.

Scaling in or out is very easy. Scalability is really about licensing so you just have to request a registration license.

The product has performed very well in my computers. I don't have any complains about its functionality.

It's easy to document new people. With the dashboard, I can set up rules to protect myself from any IP address coming from an external network.

We use this solution daily. We don't have plans to increase the usage. 

We have around ten to twelve users. They are only users, not admins. We only require one admin. A guy sometimes comes to set up a desktop and do the configuration.

This solution is scalable. It is a cloud solution.

If you have the Microsoft Azure ecosystem, you can collect logs and view them through Sentinel. You can also onboard your devices within Intune. 

You can integrate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint with different Microsoft solutions, e.g., Defender for Cloud, Sentinel, Endpoint Manager for onboarding of Intune, and Defender for Office 365.

We have a large number of customers.

We have about 20 users.

Defender can integrate with other Office 365 security products. 

I don't know about scalability because I have always used it on a single laptop, but I'm sure that there are business options, and you can use it on Windows 7 computers. It must be very scalable.

I am sure it is a scalable product.  

We have approximately 10 to 15 people using the solution in my organization.

I would say yes, it is.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a scalable solution.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable. Currently, we have 600,000 users in our organization.

In terms of scalability, I rate Defender 10 out of 10. 

The solution is quite scalable. We've found it to be very easy to expand as needed. If a company needs to scale the solution, they can do so.

Currently, we have 151 people using the solution in our organization. We do plan to continue usage.

This is a scalable solution. We have between 120 and 140 users right now.

The solution is easily scalable. I'm always trying to increase the usage to maximize the capabilities of the product offering. As soon as new capabilities appear I will expand usage to include them. 

We have had no issues with scalability.

This solution is scalable.

The solution is scalable.

We have 30 users using the solution in my organization.

You push out all the devices that you want. There is no limitation beyond money and licenses.

It has very good scalability. We have 151 users.

Since it's a Microsoft product, scalability is top-notch. This shouldn't be an issue.

Defender is scalable.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is scalable.

We have approximately 30 people using the solution in my organization.

We have a team of up to four or five people that use the solution.

As it is for my personal use, this is an area that is not necessary for me to explore.

I am the only person using it.

I am a part of a tiny organization with a tiny team that is autonomous.

It's on the cloud, so scalability is not an issue.

The scalability could be improved - I would rate it between a seven and an eight.

In my experience, the solution has been scalable.

In the last 12 months, we've moved up to the Gartner Magic Quadrant report as a leading form of threat analysis. Obviously, the more clients that migrate to Cloud Services the more analytics platforms are picking it up. There are auto-resolutions and it's getting more cross-correlations between tendency. So we're getting a lot more APT (Applied Predictive Technologies) and IOC (Indicators of Compromise) data through which you can get a better response, better response times, automatic remediation tasks, reduce the amount of the alerts and false positives — that sort of thing. It's all really useful. It's scaling out on its own.

The scalability is good.

There are about five or six users of Microsoft Defender in my organization, because we are not very big. Other people and other teams like to have different end device software. 

The solution is easily scalable. I'm always trying to increase the usage to maximize the capabilities of the product offering. As soon as new capabilities appear I will expand usage to include them. In terms of physical expansion to other devices, I already have the solution on all of my devices.

The solution is scalable.

I'm not sure about scalability. I think if you have an enterprise license and more features in an enterprise package it will be good. We have about 200 users.

I'm currently only using it on my laptop. I'm not sure if the solution can scale per se.

I will continue to use the solution, regardless of its scalability potential.

We have ten people in our office and everyone is currently using the solution. That's just in our Ugandan office. We have head office in India, for example, and they may use it there as well.

It is scalable.

The scalability is good. Most of the people in the company use it, for a total of about 30 users.