Symantec Endpoint Security Reviews

I use this for antivirus and email security.

It is very easy to use and keeps us secure.

It would be nice to see more antivirus features for USB control.

I have been using this solution for over 20 years.

Is it stable product, no issues so far.

It is highly scalable.

Symantec does not have local support.

Initial setup was straightforward and varies depending on machine type. I only require two engineers to maintain this tool.

I was able to implement this with one other team member.

I recommend this product and would rate it a nine out of ten.

We use this product for threat detection.

This solution is just another antivirus. Whether it actually works, nobody knows. If it finds something then it's great but if it misses something then we just don't know about it.

If this product detects a threat then it will provide an alert.

This product uses a signature-based detection system, which is something that we want to move away from. The current buzz is about next-generation antivirus, which is user-behavior-based protection rather than signature-based. Behavior-based detection relies on patterns of behavior to search for suspicious activity.

The problem with a signature-based solution is that if the signature is in the file then it catches the threat. If it's not there, then it doesn't. These days, when a virus infects the system, it doesn't advertise the fact. The only way you figure it out is if something malicious happens, such as ransomware. With a behavior-based detection system, you can identify a threat before it does something malicious.

There is no local support for Symantec products in Hong Kong.

I have been working with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security since I joined the organization, which is less than a year. The company has been using it for longer.

The stability is fine.

We don't have much concern about scalability because we don't expand a lot. It isn't something that we considered or looked into.

We have 30 users in the company.

We wanted to reach technical support but it was a very complicated process. There is no local Broadcom support in Hong Kong.

The whole process needs to be improved. You have to log in, put in some verification information that includes a lot of credentials. Then, they want you to upload your license information before you can log a ticket. Overall, it's not a nice process.

It takes a really long time to get support and when you're waiting for something to be fixed, it's not like you have all of the time in the world.

I would rate the technical support a one out of ten.

The implementation and deployment were completed before I joined the company. For maintenance, one person working from time to time is enough. Usually, there is not much to do.

This is not the cheapest product and I know others that are most cost-effective, although it is difficult to compare because it depends on the features.

We are currently looking for other products that we can replace Symantec with. Within the next nine months, we will have evaluated several products and selected one that is more suitable.

We are switching because Symantec has been sold to Broadcom, and Broadcom no longer has an office in Hong Kong. We want to have a product that has local support available.

One of the reasons that we are changing products is because we want behavior-based detection instead of something that is signature-based. Symantec has products that fit these requirements but we won't be considering them because of the support issues. We won't be looking any further into Symantec products and don't plan on comparing any of the features that they have.

My advice for anybody who is looking to implement the Symantec product is to ensure that they have support available. They should check to make sure that there is somebody contactable in case of a problem.

For what we are paying for, which is a signature-based antivirus, the product is fine. In the future, Symantec needs to continue moving with the trend in the rest of the antivirus or anti-malware world. They need behavior-based detection, sandboxing, user-based, and other advanced features. Signature-based detection will always be there because it's fast. However, it needs other features to detect more advanced threats.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is easy to use.

I am completely satisfied with this solution.

Overall, the price could be reduced.

We have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for at least five years.

We are using the latest versions.

We have no issues with the stability of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security.

It's a scalable solution.

We have approximately 500 users in our organization.

The technical support provided by Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is good.

I use Google Meet.

We use whatever the customer wants because we are IT, service providers. However, we use Amazon for our internal application.

We also use Linux, most of the time.

The installation is straightforward.

It could be cheaper.

I would recommend this solution to others who are considering using it.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is used for network security.

The solution is easy to use.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for approximately 10 years.

I have found Symantec End-User Endpoint Security to be stable.

The time frame for the implementation all depends on the number of users, the number of licenses that have been purchased by the company. The typical time frame is three to four days.

I have approximately five customers using this solution.

The technical support could improve because when you reach level one support there is a lot of delays.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is easy to deploy.

To do the implementation it is best to have one engineer and one IT person for the job.

We have some customers on a one-year license and others on a three-year license.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a ten out of ten.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security came with our antivirus protection as a package. Additionally, Symantec Endpoint Protection Manager comes with it by default and it is a wonderful tool.

Symantec is very user-friendly, the interface and functions are very simple for everyone to understand. Additionally, it's a very robust system.

The solution could improve by adding encryption. If it had encryption along with antivirus it would be better.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for approximately 15 years.

Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is stable.

The solution is scalable.

I would rate the scalability of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.

The technical support of Symantec was very good earlier, but it has merged with Broadcom. There are some delays happening and I hope they are resolved soon.

The price of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is okay. When comparing the price of this solution is not expensive.

I rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security a nine out of ten because of the endpoint protection and its antivirus capability. It takes care of all the requirements of its customers. If the solution had encryption I would have rated it a ten out of ten.

It just works. We have a console, and I can see it at a glance. I don't have any problems with it at all.

I can push the client out. All the antivirus updates are managed from a single central point, and it just works. 

It would be interesting if Symantec Endpoint protection could also manage Windows Defender. If they were to add a feature, it would be nice if you could see the Symantec client and the Windows Defender client in case you choose to deploy both.

I have been using this solution for 15 years.

We haven't had any problems with it.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security an eight out of 10. We haven't had any problems with it. It just works.

The application and device control are valuable features, and the live update is another one. We have a schedule to check every four hours for the live update.

The initial setup is straightforward.

Symantec End-point production doesn't support the EDR function.

There are certain drawbacks regarding deployment. We have to leverage other things like PPM.
Another major drawback is that we can't do the deployment from the console itself. We have to depend on other products technically.

The reporting is not as good.

Check detection could be improved as well.

I've been using it for three years.

The support from Broadcom has been good.

The initial setup was straightforward. I think it's automatically configured, so we didn't have to do anything.

If you only want the Endpoint Protection solution, you can go with Symantec End-User Endpoint Security. It is an awesome solution.

However, in the case of a large user base, and you also have to take care of the deployment etc., then I would not recommend this solution.

I would rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security at six on a scale from one to ten.

We use Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for protecting our network.

The performance of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is very good. It does not slow down the computer like other solutions.

I have been using Symantec End-User Endpoint Security for approximately five years.

The solution is stable.

I have found Symantec End-User Endpoint Security to be scalable.

I have used Eset Antivirus previously.

Our IT team did the implementation of the solution.

The price of the solution could be less expensive.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Symantec End-User Endpoint Security an eight out of ten.