Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS) solutions apply proactive threat intelligence and defenses across the entire attack lifecycle to keep organizations safer and more resilient.
N/A
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Score 7.7 out of 10
N/A
The Trend Vision One Endpoint Security platform provides antivirus and malware detection, and endpoint visibility. The product suite can be extended with associated applications that cover mobile endpoint protection, endpoint encryption, as well as network and server vulnerability protection.
Trend Micro Vision One - License - 51-250 Users - New Subscription
$35.99
12 month subscription
Trend Micro Vision One Endpoint Security Pro - subscription license - 1 device
$178.99
12 month subscription
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
Trellix Endpoint Security ENS
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Free Trial
No
Yes
Free/Freemium Version
No
No
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
No
No
Entry-level Setup Fee
No setup fee
No setup fee
Additional Details
—
—
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Trellix Endpoint Security ENS
Trend Vision One Endpoint Security
Considered Both Products
Trellix Endpoint Security ENS
Verified User
Anonymous
Chose Trellix Endpoint Security ENS
At the time we took the decision all other products seemed to be complicated in usage and licensing. Trellix was very simple in all the aspects: licensing, usage, support. It also was very simple to deploy, setup and manage. Product interface was simple to understand and even …
All in one protection for endpoint devices, the data loss prevention, and adaptive threat protection is the best advantage against other competitors. The cost for the platform and service is very effective and efficient. The usage and capability of this software is very edge …
Unlike Trellix Endpoint Security Symantec Endpoint provides less information about events on the user side. Trellix give an opportunity to see information about virus detection on a user machine as quick as it possible, so we were able to catch the signs of virus propagation …
It has fewer false positive issues. It also provides more compatibility with a variety of different OS versions. The sensor installation is easy to use, update and maintain as well as the reporting capabilities that it can offer are more robust than the ones that other …
Compared to its competitors like Cisco, McAfee is cheaper. At the competitive pricing levels, McAfee Endpoint Security does a good job. Although it stacks up finely against decent priced solutions but it doesn't provide superior service if the price limit is scaled down or up. …
Compared to Endgame and AMP, McAfee Endpoint Security doesn't hold a candle to them when it comes to detecting/advanced identifying malware or zero days. Since Mcafee Endpoint Security is signature-based, it is way behind the curve with newer anti-malware tools that can focus …
We were using Microsoft Defender in the beginning as it was free and quite good. But as we got acquired by a large MNC, we were asked to switch to McAfee as we had to follow the company guidelines which takes data security very seriously and personally. I think the switch did …
The solution is already in place when I join the organization. I do not have any information on what other antivirus software they evaluated before decided to purchase McAfee Endpoint Security.
McAfee is a strong, if not strongest A/V solution in the endpoint security space. It's wide adoption and strong support and positive reviews from companies like Gartner and Forrester back it up.
If you have Cisco tools and equipment globally in place and just for the clients additionally McAfee you should have a deeper look. We wanted to install end-2-end security over all networks and hardware. This was a big point for Cisco. For a managed client team, Cisco is a step …
McAfee Endpoint Security has a better GUI, better pricing, stronger features, and agent deployment is much faster. Their firewall is extremely good, and for those reasons I would firmly recommend it over other solutions (Kaspersky, Symantec etc). Like I mentioned earlier, do …
McAfee Endpoint Security provides a single platform for Firewall, AV and web control. With the new console and integration between the components, threat detection is superior.
McAfee is a cheaper price point, however Kaspersky out performs McAfee in every category. We went with McAfee, because many of the team members in IT were familar with it, less training (short term), and lower cost (short term)
Advanced Threat Protection, or ATP in Office 365 was awful. Some attachments wouldn't be delivered at all while others took minutes and sometimes hours to be delivered after being scanned. It was causing us to lose business. FireEye processes attachments in less than 60 seconds …
We only selected McAfee because we are already using ESET NOD32 for the protection of our desktops and laptops. We didn't want to use the same software for our servers so we chose McAfee instead. I personally like ESET Smart Security better than McAfee when deploying it on a …
Trellix Endpoint Security ENS interfaces better with other tools and is simpler to use. provides wider endpoint protection and more centralized control than SentinelOne's automatic response. Trellix Endpoint Security ENS preserves McAfee's dependability while offering newer …
Honestly they are fairly similar in the nature. The biggest benefit to us as an organization was the cost and prior knowledge of the product. Both products offer a great solution so it just comes down to personal preference and cost.
Another organization was using this software and Trend micro is widely used now a days and remote support is a positive thing. Also policy and updates are always on time delivered by the vendor. Online many software were compared by SME.
For me, Trend Micro Apex One with its low performance is the best option at the time to buy a solution like this, with its flexibility through on-premises or saas deployment options you can choose the option that best fix to you, has an advanced automated threat detection and …
Trend Micro is a company headquartered in the USA and provides a high-quality product with minimal impact of resources on the computers. Leaving both IT and endpoint users happy.
Trend Micro Apex One (formerly OfficeScan), to me, is head and shoulders above both of those products. You could take the best parts of both products combined and Trend Micro Apex One (formerly OfficeScan) is still so much more reliable, easier to manage, and trustworthy than …
When comparing trend micro apex one to symantec endpoint protection there is a definite and stark difference. Symantec cannot find or stop viruses but it has an easy to use agent upgrade management system. On the other hand Trend micro seems to find and stop numerous viruses …
I have evaluated several endpoint security products over the years, but Trend Micro consistently lands in the Gartner's magic quadrant of best companies in this space, reviews well, and, most tellingly, I have had great success with their products. Every iteration brings …
Apex One beats on non-Trend Micro product by leaps and bounds, not just on price but overall functionality.
When comparing it to the other Trend Micro products, it really comes down to what features you're looking for and what sort of devices you need to have covered. Either …
We have chosen Trend Micro due to the availability to migrate our physical server to the cloud. It has reduced the maintenance cost of the data center and offers the same, if not more, protection then we used to have. Also, the provider that sold us Trend Micro offers more …
I believe Trend Micro is a much better solution than Norton. Norton allows more spam to come through whereas Trend Micro does a better job of preventing such things.
I would never deploy Trend Micro on any scale to anyone ever. I work in an SMB, don't have much exposure or Internet traffic (other than the usual stuff). I just need something that will adequately protect my users without being intrusive or burdensome to run and operate. I …
I chose Trend Micro instead of Kaspersky Work space Security because of the price. However, Kaspersky is in a much better place in the AntiVirus comparatives like: https://www.av-comparatives.org
The installation is very straight forward from infrastructure perspective and it's easy to maintain the product. It's easy for users to use the agent and run frequent scans on the machine as needed. It does have some very high end features if time is used to explore them, it …
I really liked the offerings from GFI Vipre in terms of feature set and simplicity, as well as the cloud management for all clients. Another plus was the patch management feature that applied to "3rd-party" applications.
I ended up staying with Trend Micro OfficeScan because …
Both Kaspersky and Symantec were less than ideal solutions that caused more problems than they fixed. They were very difficult to manage and, while fully featured, caused compatibility issues and CPU spikes that are non-existent with Trend.
During the pandemic all our users worked remotely that was challenging from security perspective, so we had to deploy the endpoint protection system with cloud based monitoring server. By doing that we were able to keep safety for users workspaces even though some of them did not connect to VPN for a long time
I think Trend is well suited for businesses that need an all-in-one malware/antivirus/EDR solution. It works well and runs smoothly in the background not hindering the users. Our only issue with it is the use of it and secure browsers for state testing. The EDR wants to automatically blocked the use of secure browsers setup by the state.
End point implementation: the roll-out of Trend Micro was extremely easy!
Server/Device policies: creating both endpoint and server device policies is something we were looking for in a system, since we have a variety of both endpoints with users, as well as several unattended servers needing specific limitations.
License Management: removing Trend Micro from machines before destruction or retirement is done in a pinch. There's no struggling to free up an unused license
My biggest flak with McAfee Endpoint Security is that it is quite resource-intensive. It does tend to make the system a little slow. You get security at the expense of your machine's speed.
Even though the drive encryption makes the system more secure, it takes a lot of time to first enter the very long password, and then for it to decrypt the whole machine. This sometimes clashes with Windows update and causes a lot of complications which leads to boot loops.
Only thing I would have to say that's negative is the reporting aspect. Basic reporting is good but still lacks some details. This is a problem with many of the software vendors I have encountered in the past as well. Reporting is still much better than most.
It is very easy to stick with a vendor year after year, and it is also easy to see the faults in a product and want to change. This is the first time I have renewed with an antiviurs provider as others have been less than ideal and caused issues where there were none before, so while it isn't perfect, it is the best of the bunch currently and I am hopeful that it will continue to improve in future versions.
The dashboard is user-friendly and allows for an IT admin to quickly deploy the software. The users do not even notice the program running in the background. From the dashboard the IT department can monitor all the workstations for issues and maintain good health of the network.
The support is pretty good, and I haven't had any issues with getting the highest quality technical support when there are issues. Tech support representatives that I have dealt with know the product quite well and have solved many issues that I have had with the product in the past. The only issue I have with support is that it can be quite expensive.
It has been difficult at sometimes, the support people at one point told me that they couldn't tell me information about OfficeScan because it was knowledge that was passed down from engineer to engineer. The issue was that if you used the msi for the install any further installs would require the msi to have the same exact name or else the install fails and corrupts the install. This information is not listed anywhere on trends website. Support kept trying to get me to use the exe for installs instead, but we use SCCM and msi's work better. We had to write a script to come up with a solution so that we could uninstall the software and install the new software. Trend did provide the technical expertise to help with the script and had us work with one of the developers in order to resolve that issue. So they did fix their screw up but it took a while and several complaints.
We only selected McAfee because we are already using ESET NOD32 for the protection of our desktops and laptops. We didn't want to use the same software for our servers so we chose McAfee instead. I personally like ESET Smart Security better than McAfee when deploying it on a desktop or laptop because I think it protects the PC better. When it comes to web protection, policy updates, etc., McAfee is the better choice and that's why we deployed it on our servers.
When comparing trend micro apex one to Symantec Endpoint Protection there is a definite and stark difference. Symantec cannot find or stop viruses but it has an easy to use agent upgrade management system. On the other hand Trend micro seems to find and stop numerous viruses including things that are not viruses. And the upgrading used to be an issue but it is supposed to be better now, in apex one
This tool helped us in delegating the asset safety responsibility to the client level by 80%, leaving 20% for the management console.
With a decent pricing, the benefits are slightly above expectations. The ROI is good.
But, considering most of the malware comes from internet, with a good email security appliance and next gen firewall in place, the online security alerts are now redundant. It could be something that can be termed as overkill on the budget.
Since the product is a full suite of protection rolled into a single product, we've seen ROI through cost reduction and simplified management. And while we haven't measured performance, one would logically assume that systems will perform better with a single product installed vs several.
While we haven't measured performance, one would logically assume that systems will perform better with a single product installed vs several.