Panda Adaptive Defense 360 Reviews

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. 

We use Adaptive Defense for sandboxing, GDPR compliance, and antivirus. We also use it to inventory software and services on our computers. Our company has around 90 licenses. Everyone in the company uses it.

Adaptive Defense is pretty easy to use, and Panda support is excellent. 

Their MacOS support isn't that good.

We've used Adaptive Defense for around 10 years.

I rate Adaptive Defense 10 out of 10 for stability. There are some minor problems when we update Windows to a new version, but it's pretty stable overall. 

I rate Adaptive Defense 10 out of 10 for scalability. 

I rate Panda support nine out of 10. It used to be a 10, but support is a little more difficult since they were bought by WatchGuard because they're a bigger company. 

I rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense 10 out of 10 for ease of setup. It's very straightforward. Deploying the solution on each new computer and server takes about 10 minutes. One person is enough to deploy it. 

You have to do some configuration, and Panda helped us with that. They dispatched some people on site, so it wasn't a problem at all.

I rate Adaptive Defense five out of 10 for affordability. It's average. There aren't any additional costs, but the product is divided into a few different modules. We have licenses for the full suite of products. 

We used others before Panda, and also evaluated some other stuff, but we haven't found anything better so far.

I rate Panda Security Adaptive Defense nine out of 10. There's always room for improvement.

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 have five licenses for internal use, not for sale. For other users, we utilize demonstration licenses or organization licenses.

Firstly, we can manage it on the cloud. Secondly, we have control over our devices, specifically USB ports, allowing us to block or control the traffic. In cases where clients cannot afford a Firebox, they can use Panda Security as a cost-effective solution to protect their devices. It enables widespread usage.

As for areas of improvement, there is always room for enhancement. The stability could be improved. Both me and my teammates who use Panda Security have experienced some issues.

I have been working with this solution for five months. 

It is a stable solution. I would rate the stability of Panda Security Adaptive Defense nine out of ten. 

Panda Security is a comprehensive security solution because it includes a firewall.

At the moment, there are 20 users using this solution. It is regularly used. Moreover, we do have plans to increase its usage.

The customer service and support team is good. We like the support. 

We have a team of four for deployments and maintenance. We have two administrators and two support members who provide guidance on usage.

I had to make a technical call to implement this solution for the clients. It has been a part of my daily work ever since. Currently, I am providing training to my teammates on how to set it up internally and for clients. 

Some clients initially prefer a demonstration before committing to payment. In such cases, we create a client profile and provide a demonstration license for a month. We use it during that period.

As for licensing costs, we pay for a yearly license. It is an expensive licensing. 

In Africa, we suffer attacks all the time. It's an everyday need. We need to protect our devices and our information from these attacks. In terms of recommendations, I would suggest using Panda Security to protect computers against these and other types of attacks. 

Many people initially struggle with licensing costs, and some resort to open-source solutions. However, when they experience an attack, they realize the importance of using a commercial license. 

We recently discussed the issue of device protection during a session where Panda Security was recommended. Many people have shown interest in the solution, and we are waiting for feedback. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Panda Security as a ten. 

We are very satisfied with the product. It's a very good product.

The interface is great.

There could be improvements to the PC policy. For example, they could improve policies related to the software to disable, folders and files and patch updates for Windows workstations and machines.

We have been using this solution for five years, primarily with our customers. We are using version Fusion 360, and it is deployed on-premises.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. We have 70 customers with five PCs per customer.

The technical support is very good.

The implementation was difficult. When installing Panda Security Adaptive Defense on a customer's PC, it must download the agent and then run agent files to set up the product.

The price is very reasonable and does not cost a lot. It is €30 per PC per year.

I rate this solution an eight 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're primarily using the solution for security purposes. It is for software and malware blocking, URL blocking, and executables. We use it to monitor PCs to check for threats and updates, et cetera. It helps with endpoint protection.

The solution makes it easy to unblock software. 

I like the way they show inventory and the serial number of devices. 

The initial setup is very straightforward.

It is stable, and the performance is good.

It is scalable.

The cost is not too high. 

It would help if it would monitor the network better and offer email protection for better monitoring. 

I've used the solution for one and a half years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. It's very trustworthy. The performance is quite good. It's updated well. 

It is easy to give access to people who need to see the admin panel from their PC.

I'd rate the stability eight out of ten.

It is scalable. You can make groups or divide the company departments and add specific rules to each. It's simple.

We have about 100 users at this time. At this time, we do not have plans to increase usage. 

We've never used technical support. 

It is easy to set up the solution. It's not overly complex. 

It took maybe a week to deploy it to the whole company.

We were able to deploy it through email or the Active Directory. It can also be installed manually. The setup is flexible. 

You only need one or two people to deploy and maintain the solution. We have engineers that can handle these tasks. 

We handled the setup in-house. We did not need any outside assistance. 

I have not evaluated the ROI. However, it is worth to cost of the product.

You do need to pay for a license to use the solution. However, I do not know the exact cost. My understanding is it is not expensive. 

I did not previously evaluate other options. 

We're using the latest version of the solution. 

There may be better solutions; however, for now, we use this.

I'd advise new users to first know the rules they wish to implement before doing the full deployment.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.