Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (formerly Microsoft Defender ATP) is a holistic, cloud delivered endpoint security solution that includes risk-based vulnerability management and assessment, attack surface reduction, behavioral based and cloud-powered next generation protection, endpoint detection and response (EDR), automatic investigation and remediation, managed hunting services, rich APIs, and unified security management.
$2.50
per user/per month
Norton 360
Score 7.3 out of 10
N/A
The Norton products, including Norton 360, Norton Antivirus, and Norton Security, are consumer antivirus and privacy protection products. Features include password management, VPN, dark web and credit monitoring for individuals, and cloud backup for PCs.
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.
Previously, we've used Sophos. We've used, way back when, McAfee, Norton, Symantec, all those. And we finally settled on Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. We're a Microsoft technology stack shop. So obviously it was natural. It's built into Windows, so we're not adding …
Unless you have a dedicated Security Operations Center working twenty four hours a day seven days a week that is able to constantly monitor Cylance and make the necessary changes for your users, it is not worth the trouble. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint does what it needs to …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint consistently showed better user experiences during scans due to the reduced amount of resources used on each system compared to our previous endpoint protection solutions. However, the main reason we chose Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers strong integration with Microsoft 365 and Azure services, which provide a unified security experience. While McAfee Trellix is known for solid antivirus, Microsoft Defender excels in integration in the ecosystem.
Defender is far easier to deploy and manage than Sophos and tends to work without as many issues. The threat assessment portal provides an in-depth view of the organization's security posture, whereas Sophos only shows the patching status of the PCs. We did need Intune to get …
Cylance's policy is to block everything and requires an active person to monitor and unblock legitimate processes. As updates and software continue to evolve, it is a full-time job to be a Cylance administrator. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a set-and-forget solution that …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is the most cost effective solution considering our Microsoft 365 licensing status. While many 3rd party solutions are great and have been used over the years, in the non-profit world, cost is a huge driving factor of items. Coupled with …
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is on par or exceeds the competitor products and provides an enterprise grade EDR solution. Based on the savings by bundling Microsoft products under the E5 license and the benefits it provides; it is an excellent choice for customers looking for …
MDE integrates much more into our M365 ecosystem than any other MDR possibly could. Bitdefender may have provided a similar level of endpoint protection but the reporting, vulnerability reporting and other incident tracking and correlation are critical in today's business …
Crowdstrike is the more feature complete product but licensing model and cost does not work well with the small business model. ESET Protect is considerably more complicated from a licensing perspective but once operational is a fine product.
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is far more robust and easy to use than NinjaOne's RMM tools. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint allows us to easily manage our endpoints, from an almost single pane of glass, whereas Ninja has multiple settings, policies, etc. that are harder to …
We use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint along with Crowdstrike on some of our critical systems as it enhances the protection we have for our environment.
We have not used anything else other than Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. Maybe we've used other antivirus software like Sophos and things like that. They're just not all encompassing and that's why we moved to use this product.
I have been working with customers that they are transitioning from Sentinel One, CrowdStrike to Defender for Endpoint, right? So I think it's because they see the value in the product and also they see how much they can save in terms of the cost for companies because they …
We previously used CrowdStrike on our servers. However, the seamless integration of Microsoft Defender (MD) with XDR and the entire Microsoft ecosystem led us to choose Microsoft Defender for Endpoint (MDE).
What we love more about this product is the way this pro gets integrated into the other family of solutions, especially Defender for Identity or the XDR solutions. We think that the market, the customers are full of unattended consults coming out from different vendors and that …
Password manager is great and it is a life saver as I hardly remember passwords. Symantex Endpoint protection was used by my organization and it was silent, great except that system used to halt when the scan was happening
Updates are better in Norton. Support is always greater with Norton. The interfaces are totally different and it is so easy to use Norton. Th cost of renewal is also better in Norton compared to McAfee data center security suite.
I actually have been victimized avast at no cost and it slowed down my entire laptop and it hangs every time I scan the system for threats. This frustration created Pine Tree State to switch to Norton.
I have found Norton doesn’t slow down a computer as Avast antivirus has done. Avast is also not so much pocket-friendly as compared to the Norton, which is available at a very reasonable price which is highly affordable for me. The basic reason to Choose Norton on any other …
It is the most recommended antivirus because it is the most virus detected and eliminated with a very reliable heuristic, great protection guaranteed, great spindle facility, real-time protection against viruses, eliminates everything easily, is easy to install and easy to …
Using a hosted model, we know we are always getting the best core cybersecurity, but for the endpoints, we don't need something as complex as FireEye, and we wanted more than Lookout was able to provide. Lookout was terrific, and it came already installed with many of our …
We liked the pricing of Norton better. Also, it was more reliable in finding suspicious attachments and phishing emails than Avast was. Lastly, it ran better on our machines. The feedback we got from our pilot testing batch was very positive and that is what made us take the …
I prefer Norton but I dont think there is a huge difference in quality between the two. Kaspersky has some extra features that are nice (but not must haves) and the price difference is negligible.
User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what …
Our go to product is Webroot. Unlike Norton Internet Security it is built for MSP's that need multi-tenancy options. Webroot also does not need to be installed on a server (like NIS) and it uses much fewer resources on the endpoints. Norton is licensed annually, Webroot is …
Other security products have their own strengths and weaknesses but Norton Internet Security does very well in terms of performance and working with Android OS devices. While past versions were known to be performance hogs, today's incarnation of the security program is well …
Norton 360 has a better detection rate as well as remediation rate than the others I have used. It also does not affect the computer resources if configured properly. It provides an all in one solution that is easy to configure for the novice user and provides easy to review …
I can definitely tell you where it’s more suited, because we haven’t come across any less appropriate scenarios. But definitely in regard to how we centrally manage our user space and our endpoints, it’s been beneficial from an API perspective and is really transferable, with strong collaboration with our Azure stack. It works very well.
For a stand-alone business this should do the trick, but if using across multiple clients (multi-tenancy not an option). Default settings within the program will cause performance issues if not tweaked, meaning someone with networking experience may be necessary. Not ideal for MSP's unless they only have a few clients, as the manageability must be done within "the walls" of each company.
It really protects our endpoints. We've used other antivirus programs in the past, and they haven't had that full confidence in those products compared to what Microsoft Defender for Endpoint does for us.
Another pro is that it's easy to manage the management console through Intune to see Microsoft Defender for Endpoint up in the cloud and see the state of our devices.
Another pro is we haven't had an incident since we installed it.
Microsoft Defender is closely catching -up in market with existing competitors they have added DLP endpoint & DLP Network and Cloud DLP solution last year with OCR capabilities. I would say Microsoft Defender is not legacy Vendor in end point security, the need to learn from other vendors in market and focus on new XDR technologies, which is going to be new battle for all vendors
I did renew it before because support is great and cost is great. I believe that Norton has a very long experience in what they do and they are doing a great job with all the updates they provide and the work they are doing. Moreover Norton is going in the right direction for sure.
Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a great EDR to have that works quickly and silently in the background and it integrates well with other Microsoft services. As an IT manager, I can appreciate that I do not get bombarded by alerts for every small detail. On the flipside, the management site can use some work in being more clear and should be more streamlined so I'm not clicking through multiple pages to figure out what happened
User interface is excellent. The green tickmark in the tray ensuring everything is undercontrol is so satisfying. I have turned on Auto updates so, I am not bothered about unnecessary download updates popup
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.
Overall support is really good for this product. Since it's a Microsoft product, you will get good support from a number of different resources, including knowledgebase articles on the web, support from Microsoft technicians, and documentation (which tends to very thorough). Also, there is a vast user support community for this product, so user support forums would also be another valuable channel to get help if needed. I don't envision too many people will have issues/problems with the product, as it tends to run good overall.
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.
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.
User-friendly interface (it's not just AV and users who were interacting with the product), performance, resource usage (most of the computers were not very fresh and that factor was very critical), efficiency, it shouldn't be just sitting on a PC - it should protect it, what was perfectly done with that product.
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.
Poor performance against Spyware and other threats despite claiming to act against them (recognizes very few and eliminates less) It is limited to viruses.
Regular blocking of incoming scripts (in front of other antivirus)
Little or almost no compatibility with the Windows XP Firewall, but they are involved.