Panda Adaptive Defense 360 Reviews

Our primary use case for Panda Security Adaptive Defense is evaluation. 

I like the Panda Security Adaptive Defense cloud usages. Everything is on a single plane of glass like the dashboards. I also like the information I can get about the computers itself.

Our customers like the solution. 

Panda Security Adaptive Defense claims that it uninstalls any third-party antivirus that was previously on your computer, but that has not been the case. Our customers often have to find some way of uninstalling it on each machine. So Panda didn't really get rid of the old antiviruses.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense has something called third-party patch management. One of our customers was asking if we could do remote desktop usage of PCs. It would be nice if Panda Security Adaptive Defense could come out with remote desktop usage.

I have been using Panda Security Adaptive Defense for less than a year. 

The technical support is good. 

The initial setup is straightforward. How long deployment takes depends on the customer. Smaller deployments can take as little as a day while bigger ones take about a week. 

The advice I would give to others looking into implementing Panda Security Adaptive Defense is just to get more information. I think we need a little more competitive analysis info as to what the competitors out there are using. A comparison of Symantec, BitDefender, and Panda would be useful for many customers. 

On a scale from one to 10, one being the worst and 10 being the best, I would give Panda Security Adaptive Defense a nine for overall performance.

We primarily use the solution for security in order to prevent attacks. 

It is a very progressive and innovative software that does a good job of protecting the end user. 

It is easy to manage.

The product has very good protection.

We've never had an issue with it, however, if we do run into issues, they have a good hotline. We can talk directly to them.

It is stable.

The solution can scale.

I haven't thought about features we'd like improved. We're mostly happy with it. 

I'd like to integrate it into my main services. It would be helpful if there were more integration capabilities, although there are a few scripts that can help me manage it. 

I've used the solution since 2006. It was before they made Panda 360.

t is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution is very scalable. There is not a problem in that sense. 

We have clients with up to 120 users. 

I'm not sure if the usage will be increased with existing clients, however, I will enroll new customers within the solution. 

Their support is good. They have a very responsive hotline. 

The initial setup is very easy. It's not a complex process. 

The deployment can be handled in-house. You just download the installation file. It's very easy. 

The licensing is either yearly or every three years.

I've been using the most up-to-date version. Many of my customers use the solution.

I'd recommend the solution to others.

I'd rate the product ten out of ten. It's an excellent product. 

We are using Panda as an endpoint production and security product.

What I like about it is the cloud console. It offers centralized management, and users can push the agents through one management machine. Other products require you to pay to have a separate premium for managing the endpoints with a central console, or it is a standalone product. With this one in the cloud, the cloud-based console comes as part of the suite.

They have different packages. At the moment, we have an implementation for Endpoint Protection and Systems Management.

The remote control we achieve is the most useful aspect. In the systems management component, which is a separate license, there's this remote control feature, and you have something called privacy mode, where you can remote to a certain user system. The user can approve it or reject the request, and every action is audited. 

It offers an easy initial setup. 

The solution is stable. 

We can scale the solution.

The pricing is decent. 

I'm still learning the product, so it is difficult to see what is lacking. At the moment, it suits our needs.  

They could have more reports. I'm not sure if they are already there. Currently, I'm on the console, and I don't see specific reports I could generate. For example, reporting related to the history of events that happened on a system, like a flashback report.

It could apply some sort of artificial intelligence based on the industry background as to what is a critical, medium, or low alert.

Technical support could be better. 

I've used the solution for around a year. 

The solution has been stable. There are no blue screens or hanging. It is reliable and works well.

Even the reporting shows that it's actually detecting malware and viruses or attacks. Anything of that sort, you will have visibility on. It's quite good, actually. I'd rate it eight out of ten. 

We have three clients we have done deployments for.

It can scale. 

It's all license based, so you can easily scale it up.

I'd rate the ability to scale eight out of ten. 

I've dealt with support in the past. Maybe it did not meet up as much as the marketing. Maybe there's room for improvement there. We are working with a distributor in this region. There's a channel partnership here, and you have to go through the distributor all the time. The support experience is not good.

It would be a good idea if the vendor shared more information with the integrators since integrators act as support to customers. They need to be easier to reach or they have to get better at disseminating information. 

Neutral

We were using ESET, and they charged extra for cloud protection, which I don't like. In contrast, that is already there in this.

The setup process is very simple and straightforward. 

As long as you have a common admin user across the computers in your network, it goes ahead and discovers everything, and you can assign one of the systems as a management system, and you can push the agent to all the systems. You don't have to go to each and every system to deploy the agent; that's really a pain. 

The console is managed from the cloud. It's deployed on the endpoint, which is the laptop of the user.

I'd rate the ease of deployment eight out of ten. 

We are system integrators and can easily set up the solution ourselves. 

The pricing is quite competitive. I'd rate the cost eight out of ten in terms of affordability. 

We're integrators and resellers. 

The solution does its job pretty well. We're in a region where there are a lot of ransomware attacks, and so far, we haven't had to deal with anything like that. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

It's quite easy to manage, which is a good thing. I've found it's got excellent web protection. It just adds a little bit more to the product, including antivirus, application, and white-listing, which is good.

It seems to be faring quite well.

It's pretty simple to set up.

So far, the solution has been stable enough. It does the job. 

The product can scale. 

It's got a pretty full feature set.

We do get the odd false positive when we're trying to install the software. They take a bit of time and a bit of input, which they shouldn't need to do.

We've had some issues with the setup; however, other than that, it works well. 

Nothing that really appears to be outstanding needs to be addressed.

We'd always enjoy it if they lowered the price. 

I've been using the solution for about eight months. 

The solution has been stable and reliable so far. There aren't bugs and glitches. Aside from some issues with a few false positives, it's great. I'd give it a rating of nine out of ten for stability. 

The solution can scale. It's just web-based, cloud-based, which makes it easy.  You can scale up to any site anywhere, anytime. 

 We have maybe ten people using the product right now. 

We've dealt with support and they've been good overall. 

Positive

We've used Trend Micro. 

They're both very, very good. I wouldn't put one above the other. 

Both of them are very, very stable products. The only thing with Trend is we get fewer false positives with Trend, which is good value. That said, the reporting is actually better for Panda.

The initial setup is pretty easy. It's the only thing that's not working as well as it should be.

The pricing is good. It's around the same as Trend Micro. 

We're looking at Webroot.

We do resell the product.

We are using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten overall. We're pretty happy with it. 

I would recommend the solution to others.

We use Panda Security Adaptive Defense for antivirus.

The most valuable features of Panda Security Adaptive Defense are the useful hardware information it provides, light on resources, controllable from the console, remote scan functionality, and the blocking of a lot of URL malware.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense can improve by including the intrusion and prevention system not only on their most expensive platform. Additionally, it blocks software that is legitimate from users. They complain and then we have to manually unblock the software, by hash, or we receive a message. Some of the prevention features are not available and this might cause us to need a separate firewall or something to protect the company.

The reports from Panda Security Adaptive Defense could improve, they are very basic and not user-friendly.

I have been using Panda Security Adaptive Defense for approximately six months.

Panda Security Adaptive Defense is stable.

The scalability of Panda Security Adaptive Defense can be complicated. You can group departments or people by their needs, but I'm not very happy with this grouping, they are difficult to apply. For example, applying a policy to allow some software to be used by this group and by another group, it's a little more complicated to achieve.

We have approximately 80 people in my company using this solution.

We had an issue once where a PC didn't allow us to install the software. There was some conflict with the other antivirus that was set by default on the PC and it was not obvious it was running. That's why we couldn't install the antivirus.

I rate the support from Panda Security Adaptive Defense a three out of five.

We previously use Symantec Endpoint Protection but we needed more resources for it to run.

The initial setup of Panda Security Adaptive Defense is easy.

There is a license needed to use this solution and it is approximately $30 annually.

I would recommend this solution to others, they should try it out for the 30-day trial. If they are happy then they can purchase it later.

I rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense a seven out of ten.

They have great technical support staff. 

I'd like them to offer a better way to scan the hardware to detect whether they are valid. 

I've been using this solution for five years. 

The solution is stable. 

The technical support staff is well trained and very skillful, and I find them to be very supportive. 

Positive

The initial setup is relatively easy. 

Licensing is on a yearly or monthly basis and you pay for each device. It's an expensive solution. 

For first time users, I'd recommend contacting the Central Team for guidance.

I rate the solution nine out of 10. 

We use the solution in our company, we use it on each device or city cars. We use it for security. The solution works in the background and protects us from viruses.

The solution protects our equipment and it works quietly in the background, so as not to disrupt employees. It makes sure we are free of viruses.

If ever something goes wrong, we get information from the panel or from tech on your PC. It alerts us to call support.

The system is automatically cleaned.

The product so far has been good at protecting us. We haven't faced a breach.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's something that any company should be able to handle with ease.

Although the antivirus solution is so good that we've never suffered from an attack, we've had a few problems with false positives where they weren't correct. We received an error message and we had to fix bugs. Otherwise, it was relatively trouble-free. The solution could have more functionality for the administrators of the product. For end-users, it's fine. however administrators need ways to better track everything on the backend, especially the display of threats

We have been using the solution for about five years at this point. It's been a while. 

We have in the past suffered from bugs that would present the wrong message. It's a very small problem, overall. Other than that, it's mostly stable.

The solution offers completely web-based installations. You have only to install it on one PC in an entire network. It allows you to mark every other workstation as possible clients or the software. You can click in solution and simply make different configurations between the installations. It's pretty straightforward. It's not too complex.

The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay.

We're using the latest version of the solution. We're always updating the product.

We are just a customer and end-user of the product. We don't have a business relationship with the company.

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. For the most part, we have been very happy with it. 

We do plan to continue to use the solution into the future. We don't have plans to change anything.

I primarily use the solution for my clients. I'm a service provider.

It's used as an EDR, which is endpoint detection and response. The solution is used to protect my client's office and their practice.

Overall, I find the entire solution valuable.

Their remote management (RMM) is very good.

I use a portion of their advanced protection tool. It's great for monitoring and taking a deeper look at various scenarios.

I love the function of it and what it does. I love the graphics, the view. The actual dashboard is good. It has a lot of information. It's very useful.

The only part I really don't use as much is their firewall. It's a bit superfluous. Most people have their own firewall in place, so they don't really need that part portion of the solution.

Right now the biggest improvement they could implement would be on the administration side. I have to go between different logins. My purchase for my own internal use is totally different than what my clients are on. It's really difficult to try to manage both and to go back and forth in between them. You need to remind yourself: "Oh, I've got to log into this one or log into that one". It's a different portal for each one. Their portal is, to me, in need of a lot of work. It's just not very good. Its not very intuitive.

The solution really needs to update its entire platform.

I've been using the solution for a couple of years now.

Once you got it up and running and are using it, it's great. 

It's my understanding that they're very easily scaled across a smaller organization. I work with small businesses. However, if a company had to scale from small to large, it's my understanding that they are not very scalable. It's limited.

I use it exclusively right now. If my clients need me to, I would increase usage in the future.

I don't use technical support that often, so I don't have much of a need for them. However, when I talked to them in the past, I noticed that they were not here in America. They're actually based in Spain. They just got purchased, however. My understanding is that the company just got acquired by WatchGuard. I don't know how this will affect the support in the future. A lot of things will probably change.

I used multiple different products. I switched to them because they had a SIEM behind it. That's really the only reason.

I used to use iShare. iShare went out of business. When that happened, I had to switch from that. They were kind of like an EDR, however,  they still offered more antivirus type items instead of EDR. Panda, on the other hand, has the EDR plus a SIEM behind it and I'm really an advocate for SIEMs.

The initial setup is pretty complex. It's not straightforward. They were not meant to be set up for the MSP model, which is month to month. They're more based on an old model, which involves buying so many licenses for the computer. It's hard to do. They haven't really upgraded their methods, at least for the last three years. 

I couldn't even use the systems management because it wasn't a part of the license. Their patch management still isn't up to date and ready for the MSP side of things. There are parts of the whole process that are just off.

Now that the company has been acquired, I'm under the impression they're currently changing a lot of their pricing.

The pricing has different levels. The full cost depends on what you want. I personally am using a few different items. It's not a simple flat fee. 

It is complicated to get pricing. If I needed to add a new client, I would have to go and ask them what the pricing is every time. Or, I have to look up emails that they sent me that have information on pricing.

I'm a consultant and reseller.

I'd advise other organizations to try the solution. That's all I can say. There are so many different aspects of it and so many different pieces that you can put it together depending on what you're using it for. The solution itself is great. It's just all the other stuff around it that is sometimes difficult.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If it wasn't for the dated platform, I'd rate it a bit higher.