Symantec Encryption vs. VMware Cloud Foundation

I think Symantec Endpoint Protection provides very good protection from all kind of threats. Due to the lean interface, it is sure easy to use. However, set up and start up is time-consuming. It can cause old computers to slow down during start up. Overall, it does perform at the top level as a business-level endpoint protection solution. I feel very safe while working at the office as I've never encountered any issues with this software before. Any kind of spyware or malware is defeated instantly by the help of this up-to-date database.

It is best suited for an on-premise cloud solution where customer can shift their entire production environment. Also, the customer has a preference for a Homogenous Infrastructure Environment where budget is not a challenge. It is not at all suited for a Heterogenous Environment, e.g., a Public cloud where integration becomes a huge issue, also in SMB sections where budget is challenging.

Incentivized

• Ease of use for end users. The outlook add in helps with encryption.
• The auto encrypt rules are very intuitive and work every time.
• Encryption strength.

Incentivized

• Cloud enabled Solution.
• Support Container based Apps.
• Cost efficient.
• Supports both Public and Private Environments.

Incentivized

• The process to set up a user account is a real pain. Symantec requires the user answer a bunch of security questions if they need to reset their password, but no one ever remembers the answers to the questions that they selected.
• Since we use this for remote users who don't always connect to our VPN, when they change their network password it isn't always reflected in Windows and the Symantec Endpoint Encryption (SEE) passwords frequently get out of sync. When the user eventually does connect to the VPN, they do sync and really throw the user for a loop in which passwords to use.
• We found a huge problem with SSDs where an encrypted drive operated twice as slow as a mechanical drive. I believe this was addressed in a later release.

Incentivized

• The Deployment is complex.
• Recommended Number of Physical Nodes is three or more; with less than 3 Nodes, it becomes difficult to install V-SAN.
• Need for better integration. If we go on the public cloud, it is a huge challenge while integrate with an open source platform.
• Cost can be marginally reduced. SMB segments still prefer a separate license instead of VCF, or they postpone their purchase plans.

Incentivized

We needed a tool to manage BitLocker and FileVault and this product does both. Also, we needed a product to manage our self-encrypting drives (OPAL drives) and things work great

Incentivized

Although the public Cloud Model follows Opex Costing Model, it actually leads to very high costs also, the infra model in my organization is not suited for a Public Cloud Model. Hence We decided on an On-Premise Model, and the best suited was VMware Cloud Foundation, which is a complete Software-Defined Scale-Out Architecture. I also prefer a Homogenous environment; i.e, support and services from a Single OEM, so that I Can get faster resolutions to my tickets raised.

Incentivized

• Keeps our company compliant with HIPPA and other requirements that our customers have.
• Does not affect user's day to day work.
• Increased security for mobile employees.

• My organization has a size of 1300+ employees, using multiple applications and an exchange mail server that is hosted on On-Premise Cloud, hence scalability has not been a challenge.
• Having hosted my Production environment and Mail exchange Server on VCF, there has been optimum resource utilization with very little scope downtime. Hence have been able to save a lot of funds on Hardware resources.
• Due to the size of my organization and due the data load, I have been able to save on Resource Utilization and Organization Funds

Incentivized