Fortinet FortiGate-VM Reviews

We primarily use the solution for the firewall capabilities and security.

The solution is easy to use. It's not overly difficult.

The product is quite stable. We didn't have any issues related to stability at all.

The performance overall is very good.

The installation process is straightforward.

The pricing is okay.

We've found the scalability to be good.

There should be a bit more automation.

There could be more integration capabilities.

Technical support could be better.

The solution needs more features surrounding event log management.

We used the solution for three or four years.

The solution is very stable. It's reliable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The solution is quite scalable. If a company needs to expand the solution, it has the capabilities to do so.

We have about 500 people on the solution currently.

We've since moved away from the solution to a cloud-based product. We don't intent to increase usage for that reason.

We would like the technical support to be slightly improved. We aren't completely satisfied with it at this time.

The initial setup is not complex at all. It's very straightforward. It's simple.

I can't recall exactly how long the deployment process took.

We had two technicians that handled the implementation. It doesn't take a lot of people.

We found the pricing to be okay. It's reasonable and not too expensive.

We were customers and end-users of the product. That is no longer the case.

We've moved off of the product recently. We wanted a cloud-based option and therefore we switched. 

Overall, I would recommend the solution. I would rate it at a ten 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. 

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.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we implement for our clients.

The most valuables features are the ease of use and deployment. 

It is easy to back up and easy to transport.

This is a flexible solution.

Our customers are happy with the performance and capacity.

The user interface is ok and we haven't had any problems with it.

The price of FortiGate-VM is high and should be more competitive.

In the next release, we would like to see full integration with VMware NSX virtualized networks.

We began working with this appliance about five years ago.

This is a reliable solution and we haven't had any issues with the virtual appliance.

This is a largely scalable and flexible solution.

We have not been in contact with technical support.

I have personal experience with Palo Alto, Check Point, pfSense, and SonicWall.

This solution is very expensive. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

I have tested virtual appliances from almost every vendor and the only ones that I can recommend are those from Fortinet. Many do not have the maturity or a proper licensing model, whereas others lack performance optimization for the virtual scenarios, and some vendors lack field engineering experience.

Our customers for this virtual appliance are very happy with their deployments and I recommend it. This is not a perfect solution but we are not seeking one. Every product has room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Fortinet FortiGate-VM as a network firewall.

The most valuable features of Fortinet FortiGate-VM are the servers, analyzer, and track protection.

I have been using Fortinet FortiGate-VM for approximately seven years.

The solution is highly stable.

The solution is not scalable.

We have approximately 7,000 users using this solution in my organization.

The support has been responsive in my experience.

The initial setup is easy and took approximately six months.

We did the implementation with an integrator called Dimension Data and from Fortinet support.

We have a six-person technical team that does the maintenance of the solution.

The price of the solution could be less expensive. There are some features that have to be purchased separately that have their own license.

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

I am a design engineer and we are designing a security operation center for data censoring in Turkey.

We are using FortiGate to protect more than 3000 end users.

More than one gigabyte per second bandwidth is necessary. FortiGate was quite useful for this scenario, but we are just in the planning and analyzing phase. The tender should be in the near future.

The most valuable features are the web proxy for protection and web gateway for deployment.

Pricing should be more competitive, it's expensive.

In the next release, I would like to see integration capability with SIEM tools, such as QRadar, and LogRhythm.

I have been using this solution for more than five years.

This solution is stable.

From the datasheets that I have read, I can see from its specifications that it is scalable.

In this project, we have more than 3000 end users. Most of the users are security admins and security engineers.

I have not contacted technical support.

The price is similar to Symantec Endpoint, but it's more expensive than Forcepoint solutions. Fortinet is better than Forcepoint.

I don't see that it's a problem concerning the pricing, but it is expensive for Turkey.

We do not pay any additional costs for technical support or additional features.

I would recommend using Fortinet, especially its web security proxy and web security gate because it is quite useful for them.

I would suggest this solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

FortiGate-VM is installed in our data centers and is used for site-to-site connections between offices. 

The most valuable features are site-to-site connections and UTM.

When new versions are deployed they tend to be a little buggy, so they should be more fully tested before release.

I have been using this solution for about a year.

We have had no issues with respect to stability, except that when new versions are released we do notice problems.

Scalability has not been a problem.

We have contacted technical support at times when the appliance was not working well and they were ok. We have no issues with support.

I also use Cisco equipment and the main difference is that Cisco is more expensive.

The initial setup is not very complex and involved only a few settings.

The deployment took us a couple of days.

We had assistance during our implementation and we were satisfied with the service.

The price of this product is great compared to others.

Overall, this is a good product with good features and priced well compared to others. It is GUI-based and I am happy with the interface. I would recommend it and cannot think of any changes that I would make. The only problem is that new releases tend to be a little buggy.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.