We performed a comparison between Nyotron PARANOID and Trellix Endpoint Security based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."I get alerts when scripts are detected in the environment."
"The main thing is that I feel safe. Because the processes that have been used to get a handle on the attackers are much better than other competitors"
"Exceptions are easy to create and the interface is easy to follow with a nice appearance."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Fortinet is very user-friendly for customers."
"The stability is very good."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"The features that I have found most valuable are the ability to customize it and to reduce its size. It lets you run in a very small window in terms of memory and resources on legacy cash registers."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"First of all, it does the job. It prevents harm to the operating system. Also, the visibility it gives to the user and to the administrator is very good."
"The central management console is powerful. You can manage endpoints, DLP, encryption, and all the other features from a single console."
"It's easy to use and it's very powerful. It offers nice endpoint protection."
"We can manage everything from the central console and it is very easy."
"The most valuable feature is the centralized console where everything can be controlled by the administration."
"McAfee EndPoint Security has a lot of good features that work well if they are implemented properly."
"The product’s stability and security features enhance user protection and organizational security."
"The installation is pretty straightforward."
"We really like the dashboard from Trellix and we've found that it's pretty informative."
"I would like the solution to extend beyond endpoint protection and include other attack surfaces such as other network components."
"Once, we had an event that was locked and blocked, but information about it came to us two or three days later."
"Cannot be used on mobile devices with a secure connection."
"The security should be strong for the cloud. Some applications are on-prem and some are on the cloud. Fortinet should also have strong security for the cloud. There should be more security for the cloud."
"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."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We've had a lot of false positives; things incorrectly flagged that require manual configuration to allow. Even worse, after we allow a legitimate program, it sometimes gets flagged again after an update. This has caused a lot of extra work for my team."
"The solution should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
"The main feature that is missing is to have the same solution on servers. Currently it's only protecting the client side, not the server. If they would add the server in the same solution, that would be great."
"The solution's technical support should be improved since we faced a lot of issues with the support. There were some delays in responses from the technical support."
"The initial setup is complex. It is a very complex product. You must have experience with it."
"One of the drawbacks is that it is not 100% secure."
"Tech support is not as helpful as they were in the past."
"The security of this solution needs improvement."
"Currently, Trellix Endpoint Security can't find the running mutexes, while other open-source products can do it."
"Technical support from the vendor is very bad."
"Trying to move away from the signature model for antivirus and malware blocking is something that would be nice. Instead of having to update every day, which is signature-based, moving to more of a kernel or architecture-based model would probably be beneficial."
Nyotron PARANOID is ranked 50th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 2 reviews while Trellix Endpoint Security is ranked 11th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 96 reviews. Nyotron PARANOID is rated 8.6, while Trellix Endpoint Security is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Nyotron PARANOID writes "A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Trellix Endpoint Security writes "Good user behavioral analysis and helpful patching but needs better support services". Nyotron PARANOID is most compared with , whereas Trellix Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, Trellix Endpoint Security (ENS), CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks and SentinelOne Singularity Complete. See our Nyotron PARANOID vs. Trellix Endpoint Security report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) 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.