Atlassian Crowd vs Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly Microsoft Defender ATP)

• It is very easy for users to create tickets
• Standing up atlassian crowd is a breeze
• Not having to manage any hardware infrastructure is great

Read full review

• It is great at proactively monitoring threats across the network. It works seamlessly with the client to monitor individual user computers, and it has a good real-time scanning engine.
• On the client side, Windows Defender doesn't require a whole lot of system resources to run, nor will it create unnessary slowdowns of a computer, even while scanning for threats

Read full review

• Some systems that are not crucial turned into more work than what was originally deemed necessary to successfully deploy Crowd.
• Linux support was there as it was built mostly to support Windows based systems
• Documentation was supported but most issues we had required us to contact Atlassian support.

Read full review

• Virus detection rates are below competitors.
• Too many notifications that end up bothering.
• Do not ask every time if you should send reports to Microsoft.

Read full review

• New systems are tough when it comes to an ROI, as a dollar amount for saving time on a sign-in can be tough to track. Like most new systems that makes things slightly easier to execute as an end user or manage or support, it really might come down to the existing structure of how a company manages its users.
• The positives are always with the end user, which I have to say, Crowd was able to accomplish.

Read full review

• There is definitely a piece of mind provided when you know that your system will not get compromised because of malware and viruses.
• The fact that I don't have to spend money in the first place means that I can spend money on other more important things that do require it.

Read full review