We compared Microsoft Defender for Endpoint and Deep Instinct Prevention Platform based on users' reviews in six categories. We reviewed all of the data and you can find the conclusion below.
Features: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint excels in file protection, encryption, and ransomware defense. It integrates seamlessly with other Microsoft security products. Users appreciate its user-friendly interface and scalability. Users were impressed by Deep Instinct’s AI-driven approach and ability to detect and prevent zero-day malware. They also appreciate its proactive defense mechanisms.
Room for Improvement: Users say Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should improve its central console and auto-recovery feature. Users also requested better reporting capabilities and integration with third-party platforms. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform could improve its documentation, forensic capabilities, and logging system. Users say Deep Instinct’s AI model could be more transparent, and the solution could be better adapted to multi-tenant use cases.
Service and Support: Microsoft customer service garnered mixed feedback. Some praised the fast response times and expertise of the support engineers, while others were dissatisfied with slow replies and a lack of coordination among the support teams. Users praised Deep Instinct's customer service and support for their swift response and overall helpfulness.
Ease of Deployment: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint's setup is straightforward, especially when it’s preloaded on Windows 10. While it can be more complex for larger organizations, it is generally considered simple, particularly for smaller companies or those familiar with Microsoft environments. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is somewhat complex to set up, requiring multiple steps and some training. The total deployment time may take months.
Pricing: Reviewers say Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is fairly priced, noting that it is typically included for free with Windows or Microsoft Office 365 subscriptions. However, some users believe that Microsoft's pricing could be more affordable, and others noted that their licensing models can be complex. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is cheaper than many competing solutions, and support is included with the basic license.
ROI: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint delivers cost savings, enhanced efficiency, and heightened threat management. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform’s noteworthy benefits include time savings, reduced false positives, and effective prevention against unknown threats.
Comparison Results: Microsoft Defender for Endpoint offers sophisticated protection against ransomware, easy deployment, and smooth integration with Microsoft solutions. However, Microsoft’s customer support has received middling reviews, and users would like better compatibility with third-party solutions. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform offers a unique perspective on cybersecurity, with a focus on behavioral analysis and deep learning-based prevention. It also requires enhancements in its interface, administration, and logging system.
"Ability to get forensics details and also memory exfiltration."
"It is very easy to set up. I would rate my experience with the initial setup a ten out of ten, with ten being very easy to set up."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"NGAV and EDR features are outstanding."
"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."
"Having all monitoring, response, tracking, and mitigation tools in one dashboard provides our analysts and SOC team with a comprehensive view at a glance."
"he solution is an anti-malware product that integrates well with other vendor products such as firewalls, SIEM, etc. It captures threat intelligence and gives you better visibility. The product also has sandboxing features."
"The detection rate is very high. In all the testing with around 20 partners in different environments, quite a lot of them had installed with other anti-malware applications, like Sophos. This software can co-exist with those applications in the same machine. This is impressive."
"I really like the behavioral analysis feature, because it looks at all the different things, like arbitrary shellcode and reflective DLL. It looks at a lot of things that threat actors use as threat vectors to get into the environment."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"I like the dashboard. It looks very simple."
"Good detections for PowerShell. and good user interface."
"It has a very low false-positive ratio. That is important because it means we're not wasting time... We're able to run that entire 20,000-endpoint base with just a handful of engineers."
"It has the lowest false-positive ratio that I have come across. I have only had one which was a legitimate file that I had to whitelist. It was for one of the applications I was trying to install and integrate. But the false positive ratio is very low."
"It's just a single agent that has everything in it... With the EDR solutions, you have to install it, then you have another service history installed, and you have behavioral analytics, etc. With this, everything is in a single small "box," a small agent that has pretty much got everything."
"Defender has very little impact on the end-user and the agent works quite well with a minimal impact on the client and server."
"Microsoft Defender can block some viruses or malware. So, it can protect my files. It can save files on Office 365 OneDrive. I use encryption for some files, then I can recover them from OneDrive."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is beneficial because we are using Microsoft Windows and all the core solutions are made by Microsoft, such as the authentic platform, operating system, and antivirus protection. It is a heterogeneous environment. We had to use third-party solutions before and update everything separately. For example, the policy for antivirus. With Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, when Microsoft Windows receives updates it will update with it. This is one main advantage of this solution."
"Defender is stable enough and is competitive with the other products in the market."
"The most valuable features of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint are the ease of use and it was available within the operating system."
"The most valuable feature of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is that it is embedded into the Windows system. Additionally, the performance is good and simple to maintain."
"It is already integrated with Windows 10, so you don't need to worry about that."
"This is not an inventory solution, but it helps you take count of how many workstations you have, as well as what software is installed on each of them."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We'd like to see more one-to-one product presentations for the distribution channels."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"The solution should address emerging threats like SQL injection."
"FortiEDR could add a separate scanning dashboard. In incident management, we prefer to remove the endpoint system from the environment and scan the system. We typically use Symantec for that, but if we want to use FortiEDR for that, then we need a scanning tab to clarify things."
"I haven't seen the use of AI in the solution."
"To improve Fortinet, we need to see more features and technology areas at the endpoint level introduced."
"The amount of usage, the number of details we get, or the number of options that can be tweaked is limited in comparison to that with other EDR solutions"
"I would like to see improvement in the user interface so that the user has more control. For example, it would be good if a user could change their grouping if they want to be part of another group. Or if I want to right-click and scan a specific file that I just imported, that would be helpful. Sometimes you just want to do an extra scan to make sure you're safe."
"Its support for Linux and Unix operating systems can be improved. Currently, they cover macOS and Windows, but they don't cover Linux and some of the Unix products. Pricing is also an issue. Its pricing is not as aggressive as it could be, and its price makes it difficult to sell. Customers feel that they can get an antivirus for a lower price, even though it is not a similar product. It is technically different. Their SLAs can be better. They have to give you 24/7 support, but their SLAs are not very good. They should be better documented, and the offerings should also be a little bit better. What happens is that the SLAs end up in the hands of the intermediary, seller, or the local partner of Deep Instinct in a country. The customers want very fast SLAs in a very short time, but Deep Instinct doesn't give them at the same speed. Having said that, SLAs are important when you have a lot of issues, but this product doesn't have too many issues, so it is not a big concern. However, for a customer who doesn't know the product, it could be a concern."
"Some features are too resource intensive."
"If the client is working remotely and doesn't have a VPN then the deployment is difficult to do."
"If they can bring some additional, complementary solutions, like network scanning and the like, that will help. If they had some sort of a firewall which could help detect DDoS attacks and other things, it would be an improvement"
"I think it's probably the administration, especially the administration platform, which could be improved in the solution. It's clunky and hard to navigate, especially for inexperienced technicians."
"The Management Console is not localized."
"I would love to see a really exceptional, outstanding level of reporting. I know that's like asking for a unicorn to leap out of the sky with any of these products... When everything works, clients began to wonder: "Everything's fine. Why do we need you?" That's where the reporting capabilities would allow us to really demonstrate: "Hey, here's what's actually going on, Mr. Customer.""
"If the solution could be integrated more with Defender for Cloud, to be more unified, that would help. It is good now, but even more integration could be done with Defender for Cloud. We see two different portals. If Defender for Endpoint could be ported to the CSPM, Defender for Cloud, that would make things even easier for us."
"It should support non-Windows products better. Microsoft is now one of the leading vendors in the security area. So, they should be product-independent."
"It needs to improve the cybersecurity for lateral movements. For example, when a hacker tries to enter a machine, they try to get the password by doing a lateral movement."
"If you have multi-cloud like Google and AWS, the native solutions are better for those particular cases."
"Microsoft Defender for Endpoint should have more transparency. In the latest edition of Windows, Windows 11, it is a compulsory requirement to connect to a Microsoft account, which in turn has implications for Defender. This should be removed."
"I would just like them to have more consistency, and that's a comment that's across the board with Microsoft. They change things a lot."
"I wish they would extend the use of the Security Central portal, even for the free option of Defender. Because, as companies grow, it is labor intensive to manage the AV and detection part of it. For companies already subscribed to Office 365, I think this would be a good enhancement."
"If they integrate with the EDR then it will benefit this solution."
More Deep Instinct Prevention Platform Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Microsoft Defender for Endpoint Pricing and Cost Advice →
Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is ranked 25th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 18 reviews while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is ranked 1st in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 182 reviews. Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is rated 8.6, while Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Deep Instinct Prevention Platform writes "Bolsters prevention with great detection and response capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Microsoft Defender for Endpoint writes "Eliminates the need to look at multiple dashboards by automatically providing one XDR dashboard to show the security score of each subscription". Deep Instinct Prevention Platform is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CylancePROTECT, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and Intercept X Endpoint, whereas Microsoft Defender for Endpoint is most compared with Symantec Endpoint Security, Intercept X Endpoint, SentinelOne Singularity Complete, CrowdStrike Falcon and Microsoft Intune. See our Deep Instinct Prevention Platform vs. Microsoft Defender for Endpoint report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) vendors and best Anti-Malware Tools vendors.
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.
