We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The solution makes it possible to see a threat once and block it everywhere across all endpoints and the entire security platform. It has the ability to block right down to the file and application level across all devices based on policies, such as, blacklisting and whitelisting of software and applications. This is good. Its strength is the ability to identify threats very quickly, then lock them and the network down and block the threats across the organization and all devices, which is what you want. You don't want to be spending time working out how to block something. You want to block something very quickly, letting that flow through to all the devices and avoiding the same scenario on different operating systems."
"The threat Grid with the ability to observe the sandboxing, analyze, and perform investigations of different malicious files has been great."
"The most valuable feature is signature-based malware detection."
"Another of my favorite features is called the Device Trajectory, where it shows everything that's going on, on a computer. It shows the point in time when a virus is downloaded, so you can see if the user was surfing the internet or had a program open. It shows every running process and file access on the computer and saves it like a snapshot when it detects something malicious. It also has a File Trajectory, so you can even see if that file has been found on any of your other computers that have AMP."
"The visibility and insight this solution gives you into threats is pretty granular. It has constant monitoring. You can get onto the device trajectory to look at a threat, but you can also see what happened prior to the threat. You can see what happened after the threat. You can see what other applications were incorporated into the execution of the threat. For example, you have the event, but you see that the event was launched by Google Chrome, which was launched by something else. Then, after the event, something else was launched by whatever the threat was. Therefore, it gives you great detail, a timeline, and continuity of events leading up to whatever the incident is, and then, after. This helps you understand and nail down what the threat is and how to fix it."
"Any alert that we get is an actionable alert. Immediately, there is information that we can just click through, see the point in time, what happened, what caused it, and what automatic actions were taken. We can then choose to take any manual actions, if we want, or start our investigation. We're no longer looking at digging into information or wading through hundreds of incidents. There's a list which says where the status is assigned, e.g., under investigation or investigation finished. That is all in the console. It has taken away a lot of the administration, which we would normally be doing, and integrated it into the console for us."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"Among the most valuable features are the exclusions. And on the scalability side, we can integrate well with the SIEM orchestration engine and a number of applications that are proprietary or open source."
"What I like best is the integrated end-to-end security that works with the security information and events manager."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"We like the management of the ePO, and we like the management console."
"The solution is reliable."
"It provides a lot of information and great visibility, with really great options for managing the environment."
"This product has the capability to check a wide range of vulnerabilities and devices."
"The detection is great and the solution is constantly improving."
"The solution provides dashboard control, so we can centrally monitor the entire status of our organization."
"The pricing is pretty good."
"The firewall, malware, and anti-virus protection have earned its keep in times past by catching the unexpected."
"The solution detects malware very well."
"Stability-wise, it is very good and we have had no trouble."
"Offers good antivirus and local firewall."
"It's good for large organizations. It's able to handle a lot of users."
"The installation was very easy."
"The features are very nice. We are getting updates continuously from the Symantec side regarding any attacks, such as zero-day attacks. Symantec helps us in mitigating any attacks or threats early."
"...the greatest value of all, would be to make the security into a single pane of glass. Whilst these products are largely integrated from a Talos perspective, they're not integrated from a portal perspective. For example, we have to look at an Umbrella portal and a separate AMP portal. We also have to look at a separate portal for the firewalls. If I could wave a magic wand and have one thing, I would put all the Cisco products into one, simple management portal."
"The GUI needs improvement, it's not good."
"In Orbital, there are tons of prebuilt queries, but there is not a lot of information in lay terms. There isn't enough information to help us with what we're looking for and why we are looking for it with this query. There are probably a dozen queries in there that really focus on what I need to focus on, but they are not always easy to find the first time through."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"The connector updates are very easily done now, and that's improving. Previously, the connector had an issue, where almost every time it needed to be updated, it required a machine reboot. This was always a bit of an inconvenience and a bug. Because with a lot of software now, you don't need to do that and shouldn't need to be rebooting all the time."
"The thing I hate the most, which they have not fixed, is when it creates duplicate entries within a console. If you have a computer and you upgrade from Windows 7 to Windows 10, or you upgrade your agent from version 6 to 7, it creates a new instance in there instead of updating the information. Instead of paying a license for one computer, I have to license two computers until I manually go in, search for all the duplicate entries, and clean them out myself."
"We had a lot of noise at the beginning, and we had to turn it down based on exclusions, application whitelisting, and excluding unknown benign applications. Cisco should understand the need for continuous updates on the custom Cisco exclusions and the custom applications that come out-of-the-box with the AMP for Endpoints."
"We don't have issues. We think that Cisco covers all of the security aspects on the market. They continue to innovate in the right way."
"I would like to see more integration with third-party products."
"With McAfee, if there is a zero-day vulnerability, you have to download the patch for it from the McAfee website, then apply it to your endpoint."
"The software download features could stand improvement."
"The user interface could be improved by making it more user-friendly. There are multiple solutions and there is no clear line differentiating all of them. There is a centralized console where we manage everything but most of the administrators feel a little confused when it comes to managing multiple products from a single place."
"The local technical support could be better."
"They can make it free, but that's not going to happen."
"The management console is a little bit difficult to understand for admins. You need a lot of time in order to become familiar with that. It is a little bit complicated and not too easy to understand. Its price can also be improved. Its price is higher than its competitors. McAfee also needs to have better cloud integration and more data centers in the EU. The cloud center should be in Europe or in Germany. In Germany, it is really important to have access to your data within the same country. Customer data needs to be placed and processed in the same country."
"There are more secure featured solutions from McAfee on the market but for smaller companies like ours, they are too expensive."
"The reporting could be improved."
"The solution already has support for Windows, Mac, and Linux but it could improve by having better support for Linux. We have run into some problems when there are upgrades. If they can improve this point, Symantec would be good for endpoint protection as well as for a critical server."
"The solution is very difficult to uninstall. There isn't really a way to uninstall the product at all, which is quite a headache."
"The support from Symantec has been poor in my experience. They did not have the knowledge to help us with the issues we were facing."
"More control features can be added, and its performance can also be better. Sometimes, the performance is not good when we access the cloud console. Moving to each tab is slow. The dashboard can be a little bit user-friendly. For some users, it is a bit difficult. If someone is a little bit familiar with it, then it is fine. Otherwise, it is hard to find policies in Symantec."
"We are not satisfied with the technical support."
"Symantec End-point production doesn't support the EDR function."
"The whitelisting feature does not work as expected."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"The pricing and licensing are reasonable. The cost of AMP for Endpoints is inline with all the other software that has a monthly endpoint cost. It might be a little bit higher than other antivirus type products, but we're only talking about a dollar a month per user. I don't see that cost as being an issue if it's going to give us the confidence and security that we're looking for. We have had a lot of success and happiness with what we're using, so there's no point in changing."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"Licensing fees are on a yearly basis and I am happy with the pricing."
"We have a license for 3,000 users and if we get up to 3,100 users, it doesn't stop working, but on the next renewal date you're supposed to go in there and add that extra 100 licenses. It's really good that they let you grow and expand and then pay for it. Sometimes, with other products, you overuse a license and they just don't work."
"Licensing is paid yearly."
"McAfee's prices are flexible and can be quite competitive, although there are other solutions that are even more so."
"We pay 650 Rand for a license. It is a perpetual license which we normally run for two years."
"I am happy with the pricing."
"It is not that expensive. There is no additional cost. We got the entire bundle together."
"For each computer that is connected to the server McAfee charges us for each computer based on our license agreement."
"Since the maintenance is done by our own team, the price of the subscription should really be cheaper."
"Pricing is reasonable and runs at a cost per user per year."
"There is a yearly license."
"There are subscription costs, we typically purchase the annual subscription. There can be other expenses too, for example, we use CrowdStrike also as part of our policy."
"When comparing this solution to others in the current market it is expensive."
"Licensing is based on a yearly subscription."
"Symantec is expensive."
"We pay our licensing fees on a yearly basis, and everything is included in that price."
"Its price should be reasonable."
"One great benefit is we do not need to activate a license for every endpoint. The price is fair."
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
McAfee Complete Endpoint Protection allows you to protect all of your devices with intelligent, collaborative security, in one easy-to-manage, integrated solution. Our integrated endpoint security framework helps remove redundancies, enables fast, proven performance and offers an architecture to align both current and future security investments. With a flexible choice of cloud-based or a local management console, security administrators also get true centralized management that simplifies ongoing tasks, deployment and monitoring.
Unmatched Endpoint Safety for Your OrganizationAs an on-premises, hybrid, or cloud-based solution, the single-agent Symantec platform protects all your traditional and mobile endpoint devices, and uses artificial intelligence (AI) to optimize security decisions.
McAfee Endpoint Security is ranked 14th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 37 reviews while Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) with 51 reviews. McAfee Endpoint Security is rated 8.0, while Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is rated 7.2. The top reviewer of McAfee Endpoint Security writes "Protect your business against a wide variety of threats". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security writes "Lacks next-generation behaviour-based detection, offers terrible technical support, and not as robust as competitors". McAfee Endpoint Security is most compared with McAfee MVISION Endpoint, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Blackberry Protect, whereas Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Trend Micro Deep Security, CrowdStrike Falcon and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra. See our McAfee Endpoint Security vs. Symantec End-User Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection for Business (EPP) 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.