Compared to Malwarebytes and Webroot (Endpoint Protection), Bitdefender is far superior. A principal reason for switching was the high detection rate, near 100%, along with heuristics and the ability to neutralise zero-day threats. Previous products we've used fell short of the …
We switched from Kaspersky Endpoint Security to BitDefender, due to public perception, monthly pricing model and centralized management across multi-tenant. We then switched from BitDefender to Webroot as this product had the same features as BitDefender as well as better Apple …
Bitdefender offered the largest number of tools with the smallest footprint of any providers we have tested and used. The cloud platform is very well thought out and will give us all the information we need very quickly. Resources required have been greatly reduced, both on …
It's night and day between Kaspersky and Bitdefender [GravityZone]. We previously used Kaspersky both internally and throughout our customer base. It was a resource hog and allowed many threats to get through. It never updated properly and was in my opinion, a piece of junk. …
We tested many different antivirus programs before deciding to go with Bitdefender GravityZone. Bitdefender [GravityZone] caught numerous threats that made it through the other AVs. It also uses considerably fewer system resources than its competitors.
We were a Kaspersky shop for years. Kaspersky was a resource hog and it didn't even block half of what was thrown at it. We had more outbreaks and more end-user complaints in a year of Kaspersky then we have had in almost three years of Bitdefender.
Norton and Symantec seemed to attract every hacker and spammer in our opinion. Kaspersky was difficult to manage thru the cloud access. All 3 of these products used a large portion of the computer resources and had many of our users locked up during scans. We always seemed to …
I believe it’s pretty effective compared to others. Bitdefender GravityZone does have robust protection. Having used Carbon Black and Kaspersky, all solutions are pretty reliable and top tier.
They all seem to do a decent job at stopping attacks, but for the cost and features I felt I could not go wrong selecting Bitdefender while I was comparing the others.
We can't accurately answer this as the others are very good too... we like Bitdefender because it makes operations and management easier and more visible.
We have looked at Kaspersky several times but have always decided the client to heavy and management was cumbersome at best. We used Avast Business Antivirus for about 5 years primarily because it was free for education and we had ESET before that. Overall Bitdefender is easier …
I've used the cloud version of CarbonBlack and Bitdefender. They both say they automatically scan files as soon as they appear on your computer. The user/administrator is left to trust that the technology works. With Bitdefender, it at least allows an on-demand scan, but it …
McAfee usually takes a long time to scan each system as we usually have scheduled systems scan every weekend. But if we want to scan a particular system in minimal time we usually go with Malwarebytes to get the job done.
Malwarebytes beat the pricing we received from competing products like ESET and Bitdefender. Also, from looking at multiple reviews and ratings, Malwarebytes simply does a better job of protecting systems. It is easy to manage and maintain (sometimes information can be too …
Malwarebytes is much better at detecting and mitigating non-traditional or virus-like attack vectors than any of the frontline anti-virus programs that we evaluated. As such, we chose to use Malwarebytes in tandem with a frontline anti-virus solution, providing us with two …
It's difficult to make a fair comparison because I use Bitdefender on a Mac rather than a PC. Bitdefender finds many suspicious emails that it can't remove or quarantine, so I have to remove them manually. Malwarebytes doesn't do that.
We found Malwarebytes to be much easier to use than Kaspersky. I also think that Malwarebytes is better supported and has a better reputation for protecting its clients. We found the interface of Malwarebytes to be more intuitive. We also liked the central server software to …
Bitdefender had been a great replacement for our previous product - it was painless to make the switch with very few issues. We tested in a VM lab a few different offerings, but Bitdefender was the one that covered everything we required at the time and allowed us to be able to expand the offering simply.
I think Kaspersky is well suited for large and small companies. Larger companies can take advantage of the KSC (Kaspersky Security Center) servers to help manage a large network. The KSC has many good features to help monitor the health of the organization. It does a good job with updating and deploying remotely. It has inventory features, and can even deploy non-Kaspersky software packages uploaded to the center. KSC can become a source of good information about [your] network that can be seen at a glance. IT departments are normally smaller than they need to be. KSC helps with larger and smaller companies because of this. A small company would appreciate the amount of information and management that can be done through KSC without needing extra help. If the company is small enough that they don't have servers on-site, there is a cloud version. I have not used that to know how it differs from the local KSC.
Now, I gave it that rating because it's a handy tool for diagnosing issues. Quarantining them, and most of the time, it does fix the problem. Though with rootkits, it's been hit or miss, and sometimes perfectly valid software gets flagged erroneously. However, once you've run it, it tends to run continuously, consuming far too many resources and being a real pain to uninstall, sometimes even causing issues.
Once installed, Bitdefender [GravityZone] runs silently in the background with little to no need for user interaction.
The cloud-based console provides for easy computer management and deployment.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is extremely flexible, with a policy-based system wherein different profiles can be created (i.e. a policy to deactivate the firewall, a policy to allow for admin control on a machine, etc.) and pushed out to individual computers.
Computers can be grouped into different categories, with different policies automatically deployed to each category.
Bitdefender [GravityZone] is relatively resource-light and runs well even on lower-end computers.
The Security Center is laid out very well and makes it easy to install and manage the client endpoint protection on servers and workstations.
The way security policies are defined and managed is very easy to understand.
The client programs seem to be lighter and smaller on the client systems than others I have used in the past. Using fewer resources is always an advantage.
Low system resources, it does not slow down the whole computer when scanning or when real-time protection is enabled
Quick and frequent updates, usually people hate updating, but for malware/viruses, you want to be updated as possible. It takes less than 15 seconds and usually does it automatically. They usually send a few updates a day as they find more.
Protection features actually work when visiting known bad websites. The page will be blocked and nothing will be downloaded. It may not be what the user wants, but it's what the user needs (as the user can't know every bad website)
Who do I ask? This is my chief complaint is once the initial licenses were purchased through Bit Defender, there was no one to contact that could help navigate some of the initial questions I had with regard to specific policies to implement for our file server. The parent web site is, well, hard to navigate when one is trying to "learn" the system.
The second issue is in increasing the licenses. It took several days for the parent company (by contact and phone) to inform me that they could not increase the licenses and I would have to go through a private vendor. There was no intent to connect me to a vendor or provide a vendor list until I asked specifically. YET I continue to get email from the parent company reminding me to pay an annual fee for the licenses purchase through the private vendor. The parent company can see the number of licenses yet did not sell them to me.
Gravity Zone Dashboard, while excellent for those who have experience, is not particularly intuitive for those who have never used it. There does not seem to be a lot of documentation for those responsible for implementation.
One of the main things that malwarebytes is missing as a company, is phone support for its clients. All support questions has to go thru email only. This is not acceptable for issues that needs to be resolved quickly.
There is an issue when installing the client on a machine, it has a set amount of time where the software can register with the management server. The issue with this is, with machines that are over a wide area network, slow connection speeds can cause the software not to register. When that happens, it never re attempts to register in the future.
It works. I rely heavily on my vendors to provide a product that works, is easy to implement, and that they support. As well as be a decent value for the money
The product is stable and accurate in detecting security threats. There are very few or no false positives in detecting security threats or unusual behavior and has very sharp heuristics. The product does the job very well including saving us money in getting 3rd party patch management tools as the business is already using Microsoft System Center Configuration Manager which is Microsoft product specific and the product patches these third party products e.g Adobe Flash Player
The last time we renewed Malwarebytes, we renewed for a 3 year renewal. That should describe the confidence we have in the product. Plus the cost savings impact year after year.
On the whole I find the product very easy to use but some features need me to do some digging about in the console menus to find everything. I think if the interface used a bit less jargon and more clear plain language, it would be easier to find how to do things within the console.
I will give Kaspersky a score of 9 out of 10 for scalability, as it allows businesses to easily expand their security infrastructure. This means it won't cost them a lot to add further protection and security. It won't also require them to purchase other hardware and services for their required protection.
Usability-wise, it's pretty good, and it gets the job done. But once that's finished, the nags, the pop-ups, and the fact that it slows older systems down recklessly really cost it rating points. It becomes a clutter, and one of the first things we check when we receive reports that a PC is slow is whether it's running malware. Once we uninstall it, the PC is usually easily 40-50% faster. That's too much in the way of resources for something that wants to always run in the background.
Yes its very available. The software continues to protect you even if you are offline. It constantly runs in the background and will check for updates again once back online.
I've used the on-premise server. I've only experienced one time that we couldn't open the console, and that was a server issue. It seems to be a dependable solution. It's there, and it's stable.
The console is quite fast and responsive, and once you start to get used to it, it is easy to use and you can see the main dashboard status at a glance. You can then dig deeper into the individual Companies / Endpoint clients and check the status of each. The software itself is not heavy on system resources in each PC.
Users don't notice any slowdown with the antivirus running on their systems. There have been issues when the systems have missed a scheduled scan, and it was checked to run at [a] first available time, they will start a full scan at startup. This has caused some lag. Normally there are also some issues with the workstation, but it is something to note.
Support is an area Bitdefender has always struggled with. While their products work great, the GravityZone dashboard is very technical in nature. If you aren't IT inclined, it could be difficult to setup. While most times support is helpful, we tend to work with them over email because of their very thick accent, they are hard to understand over the phone.
I give the maximum grade because we have no complaints; we never had any failure, serious error, and serious threat to the company. All of its features work very well. The great advantage of having a product supported by an industry-leading security company is that regularly updated security protocols will protect the system against all emerging threats.
The Malwarebytes customer support team is awesome! They really go above and beyond to help you with whatever issue you may experience. It is not that we need to contact their support team often, but the few times we did, we would speak to someone who knew what they were talking about and able to solve our problem. It is a comfort knowing that aside from a great product, you are getting a reliable support structure.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
The trainer went through everything in the console an showed me what each setting did. If I had any questions on how to do something, he showed me where to go and how to do it. The trainer was very helpful and knowledgeable, and also professional and patient. Highly recommended.
Make sure to provide awareness campaigns on changes that will be implemented and WHY the business is doing it and the benefits reaped. Benefits reaped is very important for the justification of why things have to change and emphasizing the importance of security. This will reduce user disgruntlement and total bitterness on use of their workstation or laptop
We were a Kaspersky shop for years. Kaspersky was a resource hog and it didn't even block half of what was thrown at it. We had more outbreaks and more end-user complaints in a year of Kaspersky then we have had in almost three years of Bitdefender.
Kaspersky is a leader in endpoint protection, but its ties to potential adversaries are unsettling. Kaspersky has a great threat research team and quickly identifies malicious software and its signature. Its web-based protection is also top notch. This is a great product but as with everything has its place.
Avast and Norton's products were part of the testing for us but the cost was very high for them and the products were not light on the machine. They took up a lot of memory and slowed the computers down. Malwarebytes although may lack some feature, is a very light software.
I give it this rating because one you have the console running, you can add or remove whole companies, add computer endpoints (and remove them), and easily create and deploy endpoint packages to the machines that need the software. Once installed, the software starts to report back to the Bitdefender servers and the number of active licences is then seen and billed.
You can create groups and create different policies for each group. You can customize many parts of the software before it is deployed. You can create different tasks and schedules based on the groups. It is customizable.
The ROI for Bitdefender is hard to quantify except that it requires very little maintenance time from our staff.
We've spent no time troubleshooting user complaints or issues from users, so it has been a big time-saver over our previously used anti-malware software.
Bitdefender's customer service is usually pretty good and also very responsive, so I don't have to wait by the phone or to keep checking email to resolve a problem--although our issues have been mostly informational and not a problem with functionality.
Positive Impact: Have not had to remediate malware/virus infections since installed.
Positive impact: As far as browsing goes, we can boldly go where no man has gone before. No, really, I am confident when I am clicking on search engine results that if something get past my trained eye, Malwarebytes will pick of the slack.
