Likelihood to Recommend One scenario I already mentioned is authentication integration. So that works well. We haven't run any situation where it is not suited, so we haven't run into that situation. So I am not really sure that would it work or not. But right now, so far so good.
Read full review Sophos Network Access Control would be most effective in an enterprise environment where there are many different groups of users, including guest users because it has the ability to block unauthorized users and control the access of guest users. It would not be well suited for an environment with less than 1000 users because as far as I know, the license requires at least that many users.
Read full review Pros The most beneficial thing that I love about it, there are tons of things that I love about ISE and that it does well, but the most fascinating that I feel about is its integration with DNA center or Catalyst Center using PX Grid as the protocol wherein ISE acts as a policy server for the entire campus hand in hand with Catalyst Center to make sure that the policy policy follows the user and also in the background hand in hand with DNA Center or Catalyst Center makes sure microsegmentation is implemented so that east west traffic is blocked and takes care of the campus. Read full review Provides enforcement of security policies for Windows PCs As part of the Sophos Security Suite provides outstanding protection from viruses Uses a very nice web-based GUI Read full review Cons I guess the user experience itself, it's sometimes a little bit slow, but this is also dependent on the platform and the scale of the deployment of course. But actually functionality-wise it's really, really good. But yeah, it could sometimes be a little quicker to react on the good front. Read full review Customer support was basically non-existent during the time we needed it the most. This should be #1 priority for any company. Lack of support for Linux servers and Mac OS The reporting system relies on information provided by the agents Wide scale removal process needs some vast improvements. When using a batch removal script, it wrecks the NIC drivers to the point that they have to be removed and reinstalled. Read full review Likelihood to Renew We are so very reliant on Cisco Identity Services Engine at this point that finding another solution would be a big hassle for us.
Read full review Usability For us the solution is very easily useable on its own. Perhaps that has to do because we started using ISE in the 1.2 days and have seen it grow during the years. Policy creation, etc. is all very visible and thus easy to use. Deployment of multiple nodes is also incredibly easy and flexible. You can easily add or remove nodes as you wish.
Read full review Reliability and Availability We do have to occasionally reboot the servers when they get low on memory, but we're also a few versions behind. Availability has generally been pretty good though with no major outages in the time that we've had it implemented.
Read full review Performance ISE performance has never been an issue for us. The system doesn't tend to slow down at all.
Read full review Support Rating Cisco support is second to none, both in terms of how you access support but also the knowledge of the individual support teams. If you focus on one technology and provide "manufacturer support" then you can rest assured that you are accessing Cisco's top individuals. I feel like this is a USP for Cisco support.
Read full review Implementation Rating I did participate in the implementation of Cisco ISE and while there were times when it was confusing and we had a lot of trial and error, overall the experience was fine.
Read full review Alternatives Considered In our case, the entire core of our network is based on Cisco technologies as well as user access. For this reason it was the simplest choice given that both by integration and by knowledge of the platform it was the solution with the least complexity and the best adoption curve offered us. At the level of capabilities, they seemed really similar to us, each option having some point where it surpassed the others and others where it was surpassed.
Read full review I have used Mcafee Antivirus Suite, Trend Micro, and Vipre Antivirus. I actually had more experience with Vipre than anything else so that is the one that I will be comparing it too. From what I remember, Vipre was more expensive but had better customer support. Other than that, they both do pretty much thing as well as what all the others do. I personally do not believe that any enterprise level antivirus solution is better than any other, it boils down to which one can your company afford, and which one fits best with your needs.
Read full review Scalability Yes, we have the ability to scale ISE to however many nodes and clusters we want, but of course this takes time and money for licenses.
Read full review Return on Investment Cisco ISE is fairly expensive, but I feel that the time it saves our team is well worth it. We have been able to roll this our to all of our teams, and they can each manage their own device and it is really convenient to have each team mange their own devices Once it is deployed and configured, it seems like there isn't much upkeep, so we don't have to hire someone to manage it we do it by committee. Read full review Positive -- We were able to control guest users access Positive -- Using the entire Sophos Security Suite I only remember one major virus while I was with the company which saves on downtime, and IT man hours Negative -- The time we spent removing this, and reinstalling NIC drivers because the removal process crashed them cost the company in IT man hours. Read full review ScreenShots