Very well known for multiple security vulnerabilities including SQL Injection, insecure cookie handling, and multiple cross-site scripting (XSS) vunlnerabilities. When our website was hacked with SQL Injection we were asked to upgrade to the 6.0 release which did not help much and the new release did not have eastern language support done properly. The response from their support team at XIGLA to a question took an average of one to two days at least if not more and when they ran out of a resolution they stopped bothering to answer back. After escalating, they blamed us for not trying the 6.0 beta version first which we certainly were not aware of and they forgot that it was XIGLA that recommended we go to 6.0 to resolve the security issues which remains still today.
Feature-wise, while ANM may seem easy to use and full of functionality it lacks some serious CMS administration tools and functions. The database schema and architecture are done very poorly. All tables have simple single indexes with no referrential integrity, and they pretty much dumped everything important in one main table for the sake of using a DBMS. There are other very small tables that hold publisher names and zones ...etc. Not an ideal database architecture. Needless to say the whole design is proprietary and if you ever think in the future of changing packages you're out of luck ... you're stuck with poor security and poor design with poor front-end at a risk of getting your website hacked any day. The .NET development seems to have been done as a straight conversion without incorporating the important features and reasons for having a .NET framework application. I browsed through the aspx files and they clearly missed the boat on many .NET best practices and methodologies.