We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiClient and OpenText EnCase eDiscovery based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"The ease of deployment and configuration is valuable. It's very easy compared to other vendors like Sophos. Sophos' configuration is complex. Fortinet is a lot easier to understand. You don't need a lot of admin knowledge to do the configuration."
"This is stable and scalable."
"Additionally, when it comes to EDR, there are more tools available to assist with client work."
"The console is easy to read. I also like the scanning part and the ability to move assets from one to the other."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's firewalling, rule creation, monitoring, and inspection profiles are great."
"The price is low and quite competitive with others."
"FortiClient has good signatures, good protection and, up until recently, it integrated really well with our firewall."
"The initial setup of this solution is easy."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its integration capabilities. The processing is fast and the reporting is also very good."
"The service is centralized."
"There is a lot of documentation available online."
"The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiClient are ease of use and simple configuration."
"The configuration is the most valuable feature."
"From an application perspective, this solution is stable."
"Data Recovery: Its ability to repair damaged partitions and uncover hidden partitions from within the tool, and allow further analysis."
"The technical support is excellent."
"It speeds up the process, so I can meet my deadlines."
"The most important feature we've found is the Enscripts. That is one powerful feature that I, personally, love to use."
"I like the processing feature on the product because it does everything at once, i.e, indexing, recovery, keyword searches, etc."
"It indexes much faster, and is more reflexive because of the Enscripts."
"The solution is very stable."
"I think cloud security and SASE are areas of concern in the product where improvements are required. The tool's cloud version has to be improved in terms of the security it offers."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"The dashboard isn't easy to access and manage."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"Detections could be improved."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"I haven't found that that solution does anything amazing."
"There isn't much to improve in terms of features and comparison with other vendors. It just needs to stay more up to date in catching the malware. The user interface may be improved, which would be a minor enhancement. Unlike central management, in endpoint security, the end users don't need to keep looking at the endpoint user interface. The technology is the most important thing in endpoint security."
"The solution could add data to the endpoint."
"When we change our endpoint, we have to connect again, which means having to enter our credentials and permissions."
"The user interface could be more inviting."
"The deployment status is not good in Mac devices and sometimes in Windows-based devices using GPO, like Active Directory, that are not on the local network."
"I would like Fortinet to improve FortiClient's compatibility with macOS."
"I would like to see an improvement in the web filter, because I think it can be more user-friendly."
"Ease of use and learning curve need improvement."
"Sometimes the application can take more time to complete the image processing or fail at the end of the process."
"The reporting is a bit unreliable. It needs to be better."
"There were minor UI bugs."
"We have come across problems with the end-case. We could not find an email discovery type of module and there was not flexibility with the email."
"I would like to see a capability to ingest and absorb more data. That would be really good. It currently is lacking this function."
"In the past, incident response time for tech support was slow."
Fortinet FortiClient is ranked 15th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 86 reviews while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is ranked 6th in eDiscovery with 8 reviews. Fortinet FortiClient is rated 8.0, while OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is rated 7.8. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiClient writes "Easy to set up and user-friendly with good support ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of OpenText EnCase eDiscovery writes "A stable and scalable hybrid solution with easy setup". Fortinet FortiClient is most compared with OpenVPN Access Server, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Microsoft Azure VPN Gateway, Kaspersky Endpoint Security for Business and Ivanti Connect Secure, whereas OpenText EnCase eDiscovery is most compared with Nuix eDiscovery, CrowdStrike Falcon, Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) and Microsoft Purview eDiscovery. See our Fortinet FortiClient vs. OpenText EnCase eDiscovery report.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.