We performed a comparison between Nyotron PARANOID and Symantec 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."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 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."
"I like FortiClient EMS. FortiEDR has a lot of great features like lockdown mode, remote wipes, and encryption. I can set malware outbreak policies and controls for detecting abnormalities. You can also simulate phishing attacks."
"Fortinet has helped free up around 20 percent of our staff's time to help us out."
"Fortinet FortiEDR's scalability is quite good, and you can add licenses to the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the analysis, because of the beta structure."
"The stability is very good."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"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."
"Nyotron protects your users and does not acquire any threat intelligence."
"The mobile application is valuable. You are able to see the reports of intrusions and the like on mobile devices. That is one of the coolest aspects."
"The performance of Symantec End-User Endpoint Security is very good. It does not slow down the computer like other solutions."
"One of the most valuable features is its antivirus database, which is current and updated daily. Another valuable feature is its capacity to be managed by a single server. The solution is managed by a secure server, so all the endpoints are managed from a central point."
"It's good at detecting signature-based stuff and stopping that."
"It is a scalable product and is average stability-wise."
"The solution can scale."
"Threat protection has always worked well."
"I find it is the most reliable solution on the market."
"The only minor concern is occasional interference with desired programs."
"The support needs improvement."
"They can include the automation for the realtime updates. We have a network infrastructure with remote sites. Whenever they send updates, they are not automated. We have to go into the console and push those updates. I wish it was more automated. The update file is currently around 31 MB. It could be smaller."
"It takes about two business days for initial support, which is too slow in urgent situations."
"ZTNA can improve latency."
"We find the solution to be a bit expensive."
"FortiEDR can be improved by providing more detailed reporting."
"We've encountered challenges during API deployment, occasionally resulting in unstable environments."
"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 should be available on Linux and other platforms, including mobile platforms such as Android and iOS."
"The Sandboxing and ATP functionality does not integrate very well, improving this would be helpful."
"It would be helpful if this product provided patch management functionality."
"I would like to see a hybrid version of this solution that covers both in-house and cloud-based servers."
"Managements' number one item on the "Wish List" would have to do with the real-time scan of external media inserted into any client."
"It is only available to use on computers with higher-end specs."
"The overall quality of the product needs to be improved because with the last session we had several issues with new versions. Also, the solution needs better protections."
"They lack the visibility you get in a heuristical, artificial, AI type of product, like a next-gen antivirus."
"We must have complete dissolution with advance care protection but we are finding out that we need more Symantec technical specialists. We have identified a need to hire at least one more technical specialist familiar with Symantec to improve our solutions capabilities."
Nyotron PARANOID is ranked 50th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 2 reviews while Symantec Endpoint Security is ranked 5th in Endpoint Protection Platform (EPP) with 140 reviews. Nyotron PARANOID is rated 8.6, while Symantec Endpoint Security is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Nyotron PARANOID writes "A cost-effective security solution for endpoint protection". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Symantec Endpoint Security writes "The solution has given us visibility into compliance within our whole system and helped us ensure everything is updated". Nyotron PARANOID is most compared with HP Wolf Security, whereas Symantec Endpoint Security is most compared with Microsoft Defender for Endpoint, CrowdStrike Falcon, Trend Micro Deep Security and Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks. See our Nyotron PARANOID vs. Symantec 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.