Airlock Digital vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint

The thing for us is that we're a cloud, which helps because it can start at the endpoints. Maybe if someone has an on-premise environment where they need more real-time vulnerability management where they can scan the network, it might be that something else might be better for them, but for us it works really well.

Incentivized

• We evaluated this product against ESET and Symantec Antivirus, all the commercial versions. This had higher detection rates, lower impact on system resources, and good quarantine. So it outperformed those, plus it's built into the operating system, so it has a level of trust that the others don't have.

Incentivized

• I think the cons are basically implementation on my staff. It's really complicated unless you are very well known with the products. So out of the box, trying to get a new technician to learn how to deploy it well at the endpoint is pretty difficult because you can deploy it, but then all the fine tuning has to be done. Sometimes a technician will turn something on they're not supposed to, kill the entire computer for somebody, disrupt workflow and business continuity. If you need a little bit more intuitive, it'd be nice.

Incentivized

Cost add-ons for Security features is nickel and diming the process to keep pace with cybercrime. Limited Education budgets require us to be more pro-active in finding cost-effective measures to protect our devices, staff and students. Defender is a strong, well-featured product that is pricing itself out of the education market

Incentivized

It's pretty good. We can navigate around it and look around pretty good. I do think there could be improvements with maybe the layout or the graphical user interface on some of the things. Particularly, I'm thinking about the vulnerability management portal. You have a ton of different pages that you can click through. Maybe making it more organized, and I don't know if that's like a file structure program, but there are a ton of different pages that I have to click through to get to where I need to go sometimes. So I feel like that could be improved.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint chugs along just fine no matter what we throw at it and what systems it's running on. It doesn't take up a lot of resources either, so that's welcomed.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easy on memory and resources on clients.

Incentivized

The first time I tried to onboard my macOS endpoints to MDE I struggled for quite a bit. I had to reach out to Microsoft's MDE support team. The tech was very helpful in walking me through the steps during a screen share session

Incentivized

Deployment was handled by our team here and everything went pretty smoothly. We did have a few hiccups in our test group, but that only took a bit to get ironed out.

Incentivized

I've used Sophos, Bitdefender, SentinelOne, and, of course, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. We chose this at the time because we were such a Microsoft shop that it just seemed to integrate well with all the other things that we had set up with Microsoft.

Incentivized

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is easily scaled from small orgs to giant enterprises.

Incentivized

• Another positive impact is that Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is built into the Windows OS. So naturally, it is much easier to load it out and manage it, rather than acquiring it through party ER, deploying it, and managing it separately. So that's definitely on the positive side that we observe there's a byproduct of changing Microsoft Defender for Endpoint.

Incentivized