I'm my company's "security guy." I agree it would definitely make my job easier if the rest of IT had the basic knowledge required to pass Sec+, but you're not going to find many companies that "require" it.
Comparing Sec+ vs CISSP --> there is no comparison. Sec+ (and everything else from CompTIA) is an entry-level cert. CISSP requires at least 5 years of experience in security, including work in at least 2 sub-categories, and a current CISSP vouching for your background.
There are legit gripes in the security community over both technical and ethical issues with the CISSP. Google "erratasec CISSP" for more info. The CISSP has often been described as a "mile wide and an inch deep" - it briefly touches on many different topics but doesn't get into details. In my view, it is a cert for a manager who needs to understand security concepts in general, but doesn't need to get his hands dirty on implementing anything. For technical knowledge, I would recommend GIAC certs above CISSP. If I need to hire a guy to defend my network, I'd prefer somone holding a GSEC/GCIH/GCED to a CISSP.
Caveat: This list is about the "10 most practical, in-demand certifications." I'm guessing CISSP was included because HR departments absolutely love to use it to weed out lesser candidates. Because of this, I'll be getting my CISSP next quarter... but only after testing for the more job-useful GCIH within the next 60 days. (I already hold Sec+ and GSEC and will focus on either GCED, CEH or GCWN later this year).
Keep Up with TechRepublic