We performed a comparison between Juniper vSRX and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Some of the key features of the solution is that it has good reporting, you can receive many details from the connection, for example, clients and website information."
"The response is very quick and they can visually resolve our problems in a short period."
"FortiGate firewalls are easy to manage through a user-friendly web interface. They also have advanced features like DDoS and DLP. However, I wouldn't recommend enabling all of these features on one device because it can cause performance issues."
"The features that I have found most valuable are that it is good to use, and most importantly, the pricing. The customer especially likes the discount when they trade up or something like that."
"The solution is very easy to understand. It's not overly complex."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of configuration."
"I only deal with it from a security analyst's point of view. I don't really get into the features of the actual FortiGate. From the security point of view, it works, and it does its job."
"The reporting you receive out of this appliance is excellent. You will not need an external management system."
"The authentication part is seamless and easy for people."
"Juniper is more flexible with the commit check and the commit confirmed command. The design of the forwarding and contract plan in the operating system is very important for the performance when we have very big traffic."
"It's much faster to deploy a power source. If you need to deploy a firewall in the cloud of software, it's much easier and much faster than deploying the office firewall in a rush."
"We like the solution’s protocol and its dashboard system."
"There are a few valuable features that offer very good quality on the solution. Especially NetScreen. We used to use NetScreen for the the product line. It was a very mature solution, very robust, easy to configure, easy to manage, etc. It made it easy to do everything."
"It is easy for me to go in and update settings, make changes, or add/remove rules or security."
"The architecture of the OS in Juniper is very good. It's flexibility, scalability, and the technicality is also good."
"The initial setup was very straightforward. There was no problem. The initial deployment took about one hour."
"Palo Alto Networks VM-Series's most valuable feature is the visibility of the environment."
"The most valuable features are security and support."
"It has excellent scalability."
"In the newer version, there are 3850s, all of them are scalable. They fit better into the medium or small businesses."
"I like the UI. Most things are accessible from the user interface and it is quite user-friendly. With respect to both VM-based firewalls and physical firewalls, it's easy to create updates."
"The most valuable features are the User ID, URL filtering, and application filtering."
"The tool's cloud version makes application migration easy."
"The most valuable features of the solution are its stability, ease of implementation, ease of operation, and security."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"We'd like more management across other integrations."
"It could use better throughput on some of the smaller boxes for the branch offices."
"If I had any criticism that I would give FortiGate, it would be that they need to stop changing their logging format. Every time we do a firmware upgrade, it is a massive issue on the SIM. Parsers have to be rebuilt. Even the FortiGate guys came in and said that they don't play well in the sandbox."
"Vulnerability scanning could be improved."
"Performance and technical support are the main issues with this solution."
"In the future, I would like to see improvements made to cloud-based management."
"One issue that I have had is that sometimes I need to monitor the traffic, so I need to filter it according to the user and which user is using it the most. I experience a bottleneck most of the time, particularly at the peak time when the number of contracts and users are at maximum."
"he stability could be improved."
"We experienced some technical issues during implementation"
"The solution could improve its technical support."
"The solution can be improved by allowing automatic updates for the OS devices."
"The reporting can be improved."
"The pricing still needs some improvement."
"VPN access is an area that needs improvement."
"They really need to improve the GUI."
"On the cloud side, they need to come up with more HA solutions to support the multi-region."
"At the beginning of the implementation, we had some difficulties with the scripts, but Palo Alto Networks support together with a local partner finally fixed it."
"There is no proper support channel to follow up on cases."
"The one issue that I didn't like is that the SNMP integration with interfaces didn't record the interface counters."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration of multi-factor authentication vendors."
"In the next release, I would like to see better integration between the endpoints and the firewalls."
"It would be good if the common features work consistently in physical and virtual environments. There was an integration issue in the virtual deployment where it didn't report the interface counters, and we had to upgrade to the latest version, whereas the same thing has been working in the physical deployment for ages now. It seems that it was because of Azure. We were using VMware before, and we didn't have any such issues. We do see such small issues where we expect things to work, but they don't because of some incompatibilities. There also seems to be a limitation on how to do high availability in a virtualized environment. All features should be consistently available in physical and virtual environments. It is not always easy to integrate Palo Alto in the network management system. We would like to be able to compare two network management systems. They can maybe allow monitoring an interface through the GUI to create a reference or do a baseline check about whether your network monitoring system is actually giving you the correct traffic figures. You need traffic figures to be able to recognize the trends and plan the capacity."
"I would like to have automatic daily reporting, such as how many users have connected via SSL VPN."
Juniper vSRX is ranked 27th in Firewalls with 33 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Juniper vSRX is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX Series Firewall, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Cisco Secure Firewall and Fortinet FortiGate-VM, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Zyxel Unified Security Gateway. See our Juniper vSRX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls 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.