Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

We primarily use this solution for the firewall and IPS.

The most valuable feature is the UTM, which gives them an advantage over other firewalls.

The reporting is not as good as it is with other firewalls and it should be improved. There should be a customized report, for example.

The dashboard seems to change quickly from version to version, and they should follow the lead of vendors like Palo Alto, Juniper, and Cisco, and always keep it the same.

The bandwidth limitations should be increased.

I have been using FortiGate-VM for approximately one year.

FortiGate-VM is stable and I have not faced any problems with it.

It is working fine and I have had no trouble with scalability.

We have very rarely had to contact Fortinet about anything. When we have a problem then we have local support with our vendor. They will send their technical people if we need help on-site. We are very satisfied with our local experts.

I have worked with McAfee for a long time. The only thing that is better with McAfee is reporting, which is very good. They offer customized reports. We have decided to keep McAfee as our endpoint solution and use FortiGate-VM as our firewall.

The initial setup is very easy. Somebody who has a little bit of experience in VMware or with firewalls will be able to do it in no time.

There is a benefit in terms of the cost of using this solution because the price is very good. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I tried SonicWall, Cisco ASA & Sophos but Fortinet is best among them in term of service and price.

I will say that for low-end firewalls, Fortinet is good compared to the others. The pricing is good, and when you need a new feature, you don't have to buy a new device.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We use Fortinet FortiGate-VM as a firewall for our internet.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is very easy to create the user of VPN, allowing them to use it quickly. Additionally, the integration and interface are good.

I have been Fortinet FortiGate-VM for approximately three years.

The stability is good.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is scalable.

We have 110 systems for users that we can connect and we have 12 users using the VPN.

The technical support in my experience has been good.

We require ten people for the deployment of Fortinet FortiGate-VM.

We have been waiting a long time for the vendor to give us licenses, it has been five months and we are still waiting. However, the price is reasonable.

I rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM a ten out of ten.

We use the solution for creating IPsec tunnels and web and application filters. We use it for monitoring virtual traffic on platforms including VMware solutions. 

I only know a little bit about the solution's firmware.

This said, the solution is stable and user-friendly. 

The solution should provide more useful GUI features. This would prevent us from having to resort to CLI or certain basic commands. 

There should be an IPsec failover. 

We have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for around four years.

The solution is stable. 

The technical support is very good. It does not need to be improved. 

The installation is very easy and user-friendly. 

We have two teams, involving PLM managers, whose sole job is to support the customers. 

We pay for a yearly license. 

We deployed the solution in a vCenter, using VMware. We do so solely on cloud. 

We have around 10 clients who are making use of on-premises deployment. 

We usually recommend SonicWall and Sophos in place of the solution since, with this IPsec solution, if one configures to an HPE with the IPsec failover, it fails to work. 

I rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM as a seven out of ten. 

FortiGate is an Exhibition Firewall that comes with the Antivirus, IPS, and Web Applications

The most valuable features are the IPS and Antivirus.

The firewall functionalities are fine.

It has a lot of features.

It needs an Application Inspection. The threat landscape is very high. Anyone can exploit the flow-based policies. It is always better to have intern-based policies.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for more than two years.

We are using the latest version.

Fortinet FortiGate-VM is a reliable product.

It is easy to scale this solution, but there are some challenges with Azure and high availability.

My experience with technical support was good.

We are also using Palo Alto.

The initial setup was simple.

We don't require a lot of maintenance. Most of the maintenance is carried out by Microsoft.

It is a custom operating system that is available on FortiGate Firewall, and Palo Alto Firewall.

Microsoft doesn't do anything in terms of upgrades of the patches. They only do basic maintenance at the host level and the VM level.

We only have one person managing the device.

We were able to complete the installation on our own.

Pricing is somewhere in the middle. It's a mid-ranged product.

There are additional fees with this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others. It is a stable firmware, with many releases. It has a lot of features. Apart from the firewall, it comes with antivirus, IPS, and Web Application Firewall.

It has a lot of integration with external connectors, such as Teams, that are protected from threats that come from external sources.

I would rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten.

We installed Fortinet FortiGate-VM for security purposes. Our main motivation is for security reasons and improving networking.

The most valuable features are network security, VLAN, network protection, and encryption are very valuable to us.

Integration could be better. Whatever devices I'm using with FortiGate are all compatible. The access points and switches are also FortiGate, so I can easily integrate them. But it would be better if we could embed other devices as well. There are compatibility issues with other brands, and we need that. We can only integrate universal brands with FortiGate. The initial setup could also be easier.

I have been working with Fortinet FortiGate-VM for three years.

It's stable, and our customers aren't giving us much of a problem.

Our customers are very happy with its scalability.

Technical support is good. However, we're not satisfied with partner support, and we're looking to diversify. We have signed up, and we're training our engineers.

The initial setup is a little complex. Not too complex, but it's good because we like to work. It takes half an hour at most to install and deploy this solution.

We're a reseller, and we implement this solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Fortinet FortiGate-VM an eight.

We use it to separate our office environment from our training courses and customer environment. 

We have on-premise and cloud deployments. We use the on-premise version for the functionality for our local network, and we use the cloud-based solution to provide the same functionality for our cloud-hosted workspaces. We have its latest version. 

Its performance is adequate. We are quite satisfied with its performance. 

The fact that it is a complete ecosystem with all kinds of integrations is valuable. It did take us a couple of months to get a grip on the new software, but all in all, it replaced our on-premise and single-point solution environment. 

It would be useful to have integration with different reporting tools. This is something we are sorely missing. It would be a plus to have reporting integrations. 

It would be good to have more integration with the identity suites, such as Office 365 and Azure Active Directory, of different providers that we use. Integrations are already available, but it would be nice to have some more advanced options.

I have been using this solution since 2015 or 2016. 

It is stable.

It is very scalable. In terms of the number of users, we have about 300 employees and 300 daily on-premise customers.

We have plans to increase its usage. We are looking at the high-availability options for our branch offices.

Most of the technical support is provided by our support partner, but there have been some instances when I interacted with their technical support. They have been most satisfactory.

Its initial installation wasn't really that hard. It was very much doable. It was a scaled rollout, which makes it a bit hard to measure.

We did get some help from our network support partner. We initially needed extra help for the deployment. We didn't require any help later on. 

To support an environment of this size, two people are good enough. If this is the sole focus of their job, then even a single person would be enough.

There is a support fee that can be bought on a yearly or two-yearly basis. I don't think they do five years. The best benefit is that the same pricing is guaranteed for that duration. If you can afford it, I would recommend using the longest possible time span.

We compared it with Check Point.

I would definitely recommend this solution. I was advised to be very skeptical about the performance statistics as indicated in the documentation, but I didn't find that to be the case. It is very scalable with good performance.

I would rate Fortinet FortiGate-VM an eight out of ten.

This firewall appliance is part of our overall security solution.

Using this product protects our company from attacks that come from outside of our network. At the same time, we get better speed and performance when connecting to the internet.

This product is affordable and it's a good, high-performance appliance.

The updates are regular, so we're sure that the attacks are somehow mitigated at the front-end of our gateway.

The technical support is not very responsive and is an area that needs to be improved.

We have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for almost two years.

Since we first implemented it about two years ago, we haven't experienced any major problems aside from the firmware that we needed to have upgraded.

I am okay with the scalability, although we had to upgrade the appliance as our requirements increased. We currently have more than 170 users, and we may increase our usage next year.

The technical support is not very responsive. The last time we contacted them was when we encountered slow performance because of the firmware. We needed to upgrade it.

The initial setup is very easy.

We deployed this product with the help of the vendor.

Of all the firewalls that we compared, FortiGate is the cheapest and most affordable, so we are satisfied with the pricing.

Prior to selecting FortiGate-VM, we evaluated Meraki and one other solution.

At this point, aside from technical support, we have no issues with this product. It has everything that we need at the moment, and I cannot think of any other features that should be there.

My advice for anybody who is implementing FortiGate-VM is that they need to understand how their business operates and what their requirements are. They need to understand the technology in terms of security and performance before they purchase any devices.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

From security changes to VPN setup to web filtering, changes happen now more quickly.

The web GUI is easy to use. 

The tech support calls were not the best and could be improved. There have been times when we felt as if we knew more about the device than the support person on the phone. 

No issues.

No issues.

I would rate technical support as a seven out of 10. It is hit or miss. Most hits, but a few tech support calls were not the best.

We used ASA (ASA 5510) before this. You had to have ASDM loaded and fight with different versions of Java just to administer the device.

We needed to do an upgrade, and for the cost of a new ASA, we got two FortiGates which have a web GUI that do not rely on Java.

Initial setup is very straightforward with a wizard, if needed.

Not applicable.

No, we did not evaluate other options. It was the firewall rated numerically behind Palo Alto, and we could afford this one.

It was no different than any other rollout. Do as much configuring before dropping it into your environment (especially if you are using content filtering with multiple groups) and make sure you are able to rollback to the old device, if necessary.