We performed a comparison between Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product's anti-spam and malware-scanning features are useful. We scan email attachments, documents, and malicious codes."
"The global review and remediation of malicious code is probably the most valuable feature."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"It just runs in the background. I don't have to worry about, making sure it's Intelligence. So, you know, this kind of makes it very easy, have to worry about installing. It is easy to use."
"The solution blocks incoming threats on the local PC or any cloud-based threats."
"Microsoft collects trillions of signals from all over the world, which is incredibly valuable. It helps us identify zero-day vulnerabilities and global threats."
"Its user-friendliness is its most valuable aspect."
"The product’s most valuable feature is the ability to provide threat detection and protection simultaneously."
"It has excellent scalability."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its stability, ease of implementation, ease of operation, and security."
"The Palo Alto VM-Series is nice because I can move the firewalls easily."
"It is an easy-to-scale product."
"In the newer version, there are 3850s, all of them are scalable. They fit better into the medium or small businesses."
"The most valuable feature is that you can launch it in a very short time. You don't have to wait for the hardware to arrive and get it staged and installed. From that perspective, it is easy to launch. It is also scalable."
"The most valuable features are web control and IPS/IDS."
"The solution enables organizations to enforce policies."
"The solution could be more stable and precise because, at times, the threats detected are not legitimate."
"Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence should integrate with different platforms."
"The price could be improved."
"The price of the solution is an area of concern where improvements are required. In general, the solution's price needs to be reduced."
"I would like to see more AI features and capabilities."
"The tool's onboarding of users that use on-premise or hybrid environments needs to be improved."
"I would like for there to be extra confirmation that there aren't viruses. Even if the virus detection software is always running there could be hidden applications that are using the computer."
"One area where Microsoft Defender could be improved is in its support for non-Microsoft products, particularly for systems running Linux or other open-source platforms across ecosystems."
"We have ran into issues with Palo Alto’s limitations for resolving large IP lists from DNS lookups, as well as the antivirus interfering with App-ID."
"We don't know how it will scale once we start putting more load on it."
"It'll help if Palo Alto Networks provided better documentation."
"The product could provide protection above Layer 3, which gets into the application layer and provides better visibility into those aspects of application security."
"The user-friendliness of the UI could be improved."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"There are some delays that I have observed when my company communicates with Palo Alto's support engineers."
"The utilization monitoring and GUI have room for improvement."
More Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence Pricing and Cost Advice →
Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is ranked 15th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 23 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) with 52 reviews. Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence writes "A tool that offers endpoint protection with low maintenance costs". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence is most compared with Microsoft Sentinel, STAXX, Cisco Threat Grid, ThreatConnect Threat Intelligence Platform (TIP) and VirusTotal, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco Secure Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Microsoft Defender Threat Intelligence vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) vendors.
We monitor all Advanced Threat Protection (ATP) 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.