Korede OlatunjiApplication Manager at Huntington Bancshares Incorporated
Michael NdwigaIT Officer at Kim-Fay EA Ltd
Anonymous UserSenior IT Administrator for Global Group at a manufacturing company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"For the initial first level of support, we provide it from our side. If there's escalation required, we use Cisco tech for the AMP. And again, they are perfect. I mean, one of the best, compared to any other vendors."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the IPS and the integration with ISE."
"The simplicity of use is its most valuable feature. You can very clearly see things."
"The stability of the solution is perfect. I believe it's the most stable solution on the market right now."
"I am really satisfied with the technical support."
"It is a very stable program."
"The solution's integration capabilities are excellent. It's one of the best features."
"It doesn't impact the devices. It is an agent-based solution, and we see no performance knock on cell phones. That was a big thing for us, especially in the mobile world. We don't see battery degradation like you do with other solutions which really drain the battery, as they're constantly doing things. That can shorten the useful life of a device."
"I like the simplicity of this solution and the fact that it saves us time. The deployment was really straightforward and useful and I am impressed by the anti-virus endpoint detection and response offered by this solution."
"The solution has exchange protection. It has a content control, device control, a firewall, and anti-malware as well. They are all quite valuable features for us."
"The endpoint protection is the solution's most valuable feature."
"The feature I find most valuable is the advance search engine."
"Panda Security solution has a feature to block any unknown process and that is what is best about it."
"The patch management module is very important."
"The most valuable feature is the web filter application control."
"It's very easy to deploy, we don't have any problem or issues. It's most full automatic. It basically takes the assumption that everything is supposed to be a suspect; files, processes, URL accesses, and so on."
"Their remote management (RMM) is very good."
"The protection from malware is the most important feature. It has some endpoint information about the vehicle of the virus, malware, etc. It is also stable and easy to install, and they also provide good technical support."
"The product so far has been good at protecting us. We haven't faced a breach."
"The solution needs more in-depth analytics."
"In the next version of this solution, I would like to see the addition of local authentication."
"The initial setup is a bit complex because you need to execute existing antiviruses or security software that you have on your device."
"In the next release, I would for it to have back up abilities. I would like the ability to go back to a point in time to when my PC was uninfected and to the moment of when the infection happened."
"The reporting and analytics areas of the solution need to be improved."
"I would like more seamless integration."
"The technical support is very slow."
"I would recommend that the solution offer more availability in terms of the product portfolio and integration with third-party products."
"There are blurred lines between anti-virus and endpoint detection so I would say it can be confusing when you are considering buying this program. I would like to see that being explained better to the customer."
"There needs to be better integration with the environment. Especially, for the active directory and also for keeping up with the changes from Microsoft. We use a lot of Microsoft OS. I have noted that sometimes they lag behind Microsoft updates. For example, when with Windows 10. I had some issues with deploying to Windows 10 because the solution was behind in updating their own services to match the Microsoft release."
"The database needs improvement. It needs to be updated quite a bit."
"I would like to see better data protection."
"They need to expand their offering of add-ons to enhance capabilities further."
"Improvements could be made in terms of how the reporting is structured."
"The Linux installation is performed on the command line and they need a package installer for that operating system."
"The gap between the two final conclusions is a problem, whether or not a file is known to be malware or is known to be safe."
"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."
"It needs some improvements in the DNS security feature. Currently, it does not have full DNS security. It only has semi-DNS security, which can be improved. It is an important feature for us, and it would be really good if they can improve the DNS security feature. Our group has some plans to change to Cisco AMP, which has features such as DNS, Umbrella. We are trying to learn about Cisco AMP and compare it with Panda."
"Occasionally, we suffer from little bugs that give us the wrong message."
"The costs of 50 licenses of AMP for three years is around $9,360."
"The price is very good."
"The visibility that we have into the endpoint and the forensics that we're able to collect give us value for the price. This is not an overly expensive solution, considering all the things that are provided. You get great performance and value for the cost."
"Whenever you are doing the licensing process, I would highly advise to look at what other Cisco solutions you have in your organization, then evaluate if an Enterprise Agreement is the best way to go. In our case, it was the best way to go. Since we had so many other Cisco products, we were able to tie those in. We were actually able to get several Cisco security solutions for less than if we had bought three or four Cisco security solutions independently or ad hoc."
"In our case, it is a straightforward annual payment through our Enterprise Agreement."
"Our company was very happy with the price of Cisco AMP. It was about a third of what we were paying for System Center Endpoint Protection."
"There are a couple of different consumption models: Pay up front, or if you have an enterprise agreement, you can do a monthly thing. Check your licensing possibilities and see what's best for your organization."
"The Enterprise Agreement is like an all-you-can-eat buffet of Cisco products. In that vein, it was very affordable."
"There's a yearly cost for licensing. For us, that comes to $1,400. There are no additional costs beyond the license itself."
"Our licensing fee is 1M Euro per month, so it is about 80 Euro's per user."
"Panda is cloud-only and comes at a reasonable cost. It is a set price per seat."
"The price of this solution depends on the number of licenses that you are purchasing."
"The licensing is subscription-based and priced well compared to other endpoint security solutions."
"The licensing costs are not too high. We pay about 20 Euros a year. It's a reasonable amount to pay."
Earn 20 points
Advanced Malware Protection (AMP) is subscription-based, managed through a web-based management console, and deployed on a variety of platforms that protects endpoints, network, email and web Traffic. AMP key features include the following: Global threat intelligence to proactively defend against known and emerging threats, Advanced sandboxing that performs automated static and dynamic analysis of files against more than 700 behavioral indicators, Point-in-time malware detection and blocking in real time and Continuous analysis and retrospective security regardless of the file's disposition and Continuous analysis and retrospective security.
Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection (HVI) is the first security solution that is able to uncover memory violations that endpoint security tools sometimes miss by directly analyzing raw memory lines - thereby ensuring they are not being altered by malware.
Adaptive Defense 360 is a cyber-security service that combines next-generation protection (NG EPP) and detection and remediation technologies (EDR), with the ability to classify 100% of running processes.
Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is ranked 34th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 3 reviews while Panda Security Adaptive Defense is ranked 19th in Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business with 8 reviews. Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is rated 7.4, while Panda Security Adaptive Defense is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection writes "An excellent endpoint protection that's scalable and reasonably priced". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Panda Security Adaptive Defense writes "Simple enough to be used by a non technical specialist but it needs better threat intelligence ". Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection is most compared with CrowdStrike Falcon, Cortex XDR by Palo Alto Networks, Carbon Black CB Defense and Kaspersky Endpoint Security, whereas Panda Security Adaptive Defense is most compared with Microsoft Defender Antivirus, ESET Endpoint Security, Sophos Intercept X, Kaspersky Endpoint Security and Bitdefender GravityZone Ultra. See our Bitdefender Hypervisor Introspection vs. Panda Security Adaptive Defense report.
See our list of best Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business vendors.
We monitor all Endpoint Protection (EPP) for Business 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.