Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Reviews

We use the most up-to-date version. 

Our primary use case is for basic EDRs for simple interfaces.

In terms of improvement, they update the platform it seems quite a bit. Every month something is in a new spot or something changed somewhere. There should be less of that.

I have been using Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for a couple of months. 

It seems stable.

It's pretty easy to scale.

A handful of people with each in charge of different areas are involved in the maintenance of the solution. It's people in system admin.

I have dealt with tech support a couple of times. They're usually pretty responsive. The first person might not know what the deal is, but they usually are able to get us to the right person, get a resolution for us, and answer our questions pretty quickly.

We used CrowdStrike but we switched to Microsoft because of the price. It's cheaper. There were other major differences. 

The initial setup was pretty complex in the way the various tools integrate. Trying to figure out permissions and getting access to certain things is complex. 

Global admin uses the tool, but then you have to get additional roles for the data loss stuff.

Make sure you read the documentation and understand what else is required before you get started.

I would rate it a seven out of ten. 

I don't think that another tool is doing anything better, or this one doesn't. It's just about using it and seeing where to find the stuff.

We use this solution for business security protection.

One of the main features is the solution is very light on resources and we do not have any problems with it.

There is room to improve the security of the solution.

We have plans to add an email security solution because this solution does not provide us with what we want.

I have been using this solution for approximately three years.

The solution is stable.

I have found the scalability of the solution good.

We were previously using the Avast security solution.

The installation is very easy, it takes only one day.

We did the implementation ourselves. We have approximately 10 engineers able to do the deployments and maintenance. 

There is not a license required for this particular solution.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Microsoft Defender Antivirus an eight out of ten.

It can reach our applications and PC activities in the cloud.

Notifications are always popping up — I hate that. It could also be easier to use and more robust, overall. 

I have been using Microsoft Defender Antivirus for roughly two years. 

Within our organization, there are roughly 500 employees covered by Microsoft Defender Antivirus.

We have a team of 10 employees that handle all maintenance-related issues. We definitely plan to continue using this solution. 

Microsoft Defender Antivirus could be more scalable. 

I am satisfied with the technical support. 

Microsoft Defender Antivirus is easy to install. Installation takes half an hour, maximum.

Microsoft Defender Antivirus integrates automatically. 

You need a license to use this solution. 

We evaluated McAfee MOVE antivirus. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven. If they improved the scalability, I would give it a higher rating.

Our primary use case for Windows Defender is to prevent malware and viruses. Security is the main purpose that it is used for by our organization.

We are no longer buying a separate antivirus with Windows 10 Server Enterprise. We are no longer buying antivirus solutions where there is no compatibility with Windows 10.

The malware features are most valuable for us because if you have an application that attacks, it is defended. It gives you a prompt and doesn't allow you to launch that app. 

If there's an application that has suspicious malware you downloaded from the internet, it gives you a prompt to prevent the application from launching.

Microsoft Windows Defender moves it to the recycle bin automatically.

Microsoft Windows Defender doesn't have a game mode. Other antivirus software (like BitDefender) have something known as a game mode. 

If you want to play a game, just enable the game mode to allow certain traffic without needing to configure it. Windows Defender doesn't have that.

There's no Windows Server edition for Windows Defender as part of the distribution.

In my experience, Microsoft Windows Defender has never caused any issues in operation. It is very stable. It doesn't affect the system.

Since it's a Microsoft product, scalability is top-notch. This shouldn't be an issue.

I have never had a problem with technical support. I didn't use it. I have never had any performance issues with it.

We used Bitdefender, McAfee, and Norton antivirus software previously. Those are the main experiences that we have. We used all of those at various times.

Microsoft Windows Defender installs automatically. There's no setup procedure. When you install Windows Suite or Enterprise on your machine, it installs quickly. 

There's nothing that might disturb it being activated. It installs with the operating system.

It's free because it comes with Windows. It's a free solution. We're not paying any license.

That's why it's better than Bitdefender, McAfee, or Norton. It's free.

For Windows Defender, there's no server edition for it. It's free. There is no additional cost. It's part of Windows, i.e. if you have issues with compatibility using other products. 

If you paid for Windows, it already comes with Windows Pro and Windows Enterprise automatically. It's better to go with it than pay the additional expense of deploying other solutions.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a nine. It doesn't have all the features that it needs to be perfect.

We use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for threat protection.

The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are the ease of use and it was available within the operating system.

The biggest issue I had with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint was the antivirus and ransomware. I wanted central visibility over all the machines that we operate.

I have used Microsoft Defender for Endpoint within the past 12 months.

We have approximately 10 to 15 people using the solution in my organization.

The technical support from Microsoft is good.

The initial installation could have been easier.

There is an annual license required.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a seven out of ten.

We use Defendor for endpoint monitoring. It alerts us when a machine has issues, and we take the necessary steps to resolve them.

We are a Microsoft shop, and Defender is a Microsoft solution that provides some security at a reasonable cost.

I want Microsoft Defender to have the ability to deal with some issues automatically, so I don't need to address that issue manually.

We started testing our endpoints and preparing to deploy Microsoft Defender about two months ago. 

I would say yes, it is.

Microsoft support is excellent.

Deploying Microsoft Defender took some time because we had to push it through. You can install Symantec using the GUI, but we have to use the GPO to push the agent. It would be nice if Defender streamlined that.

Defender isn't 100 percent deployed yet, but it's working for some employees. When a machine comes on board, Defender will deploy an agent on that device when the script runs. A person logs on, the agent installs, and the device is onboarded.

I rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint eight out of 10. It's a cost-effective solution for Microsoft shops.

We are a government organization, and we use Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Protection.

We also use it for vulnerability scanning and assessment, which is very useful.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a robust platform. The endpoint detection response is quite good.

Some executive reporting is inefficient, and we're looking into ways to improve it.

In the next release, I would like to see better management reporting.

I have been working with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint for two years.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is a stable solution.

Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is definitely scalable.

Technical support is quite good.

Previously, we didn't work with anything as sophisticated. We used a pretty old-style endpoint detection response.

On new devices, the initial setup is quite easy, while some of the older devices had some issues unpicking the old EDR product that had nothing to do with Defender.

Pricing can always be lower.

To achieve the best results holistically, consider the total cost of ownership of the Microsoft suite of products.

I would rate Microsoft Defender for Endpoint a seven out of ten.

It's used to protect endpoints and, for some customers, it is used to deploy Microsoft 365 suite features. Most of our clients are medium-sized businesses.

The most important and the most relevant features of Defender for Endpoint are the malware and ransomware protection.

I would like to see the next generation of the tool improved to work with other operating systems, like Linux.

I have had about a year's worth of experience with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. I am a subject matter expert for a Microsoft partner in Colombia. We develop portfolios and solutions for our customers that need Microsoft products in their infrastructure. My role deals with the architecture of solutions.

I don't recall any issues with the solution.

It scales easily.

I haven't had to use technical support for the solution.

The setup depends on the customer, but it is generally simple.

Some customers have the licensing of the suite and have all infrastructure prepared for the installation and deployment. But in some cases, when customers haven't deployed the solution and don't have licenses, it can be expensive to start from scratch.

Customers haven't given us any feedback about difficulties with the solution. With its intelligence and tools over cloud infrastructure, it's a good product. We are developing some use cases and projects for customers with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint. It is good for us.