Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users
Cloud Security Engineer at a computer software company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Reliable, user-friendly, and has a nice interface
Pros and Cons
  • "It's great for creating signatures and activating activities."
  • "Instead of searching their knowledge base in their website, maybe they can interact with us in the user interface to explain things better."

What is our primary use case?

We use Panorama in order to centrally manage our firewall.

What is most valuable?

Basically, in my firewalls, I usually create new signatures and deploy them for each endpoint firewall in each region. It's great for creating signatures and activating activities.

It's pretty user-friendly. The user interface is good. 

The product has been stable. 

What needs improvement?

It's not part of my role to connect other devices to Panorama, so I don't know how the integration works. I maybe need a better understanding of how the policies of the signature work. For example, what does it mean to exclude an IP, and what are the policy rules and priorities? I need more knowledge about the signature policy and priorities.

Instead of searching their knowledge base in their website, maybe they can interact with us in the user interface to explain things better. If they had pop-ups to help guide us, we might get fewer failures along the way. Small notifications would be quite helpful. 

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with the solution for one year. 

Buyer's Guide
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
January 2025
Learn what your peers think about Palo Alto Networks Panorama. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is very stable, from my experience, at least. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. I'd rate it an eight or nine out of ten in terms of stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I don't deal with scaling the solution. I am not sure what is possible. 

We have about five to ten users on the solution right now. 

How are customer service and support?

I had some interactions with the technical support of Palo Alto.

They have been pretty good overall. We are mostly satisfied. 

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are using Aqua Sec. 

How was the initial setup?

I did not handle the initial setup process. I can't speak to how it went. 

What about the implementation team?

Our technical team manages the initial implementation process. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

In my experience in general, Palo Alto is very expensive.

We tested Palo Alto solution for Kubernetes, and the Aqua Sec and Aqua Sec was much cheaper than Palo Alto. If Palo Alto were less expensive like them, maybe we would've chosen them over Aqua Sec.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

I've never compared the solution to other options. The company uses it and therefore I do too. 

What other advice do I have?

We are working with version ten or somewhere around that. I am not sure of the exact version. 

I'm an end-user and I am non-technical. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Head of IT Department at a logistics company with 11-50 employees
Real User
Offers a lot of advanced functionality that is easy to deploy and the GUI is easy to use
Pros and Cons
  • "Using this solution means that you can store logs for longer periods, up to perhaps two years, depending on your attached storage."
  • "The dual WAN functionality is missing in this solution."

What is our primary use case?

This is a solution that we implement for our customers.

It allows our customers to manage several firewalls from a central location. Some examples are securing the internet edge, data centers, micro-segmentation within the data centers, and securing their campuses.

The majority of the deployments are on-premises, however, we have more and more customers that are moving to the cloud. This solution is helping them to secure their cloud, as well.

How has it helped my organization?

Using this solution means that you can store logs for longer periods, up to perhaps two years, depending on your attached storage.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is the ease of use that comes from the GUI. I have found that you can do almost everything from the GUI. You rarely have to log into the CLI, at perhaps once in six months or a year.

This solution offers a lot of advanced functionality that is easy to deploy and not available from other vendors. An example of this is credential theft. Credentials are sometimes collected through phishing emails or websites, and this solution helps to reduce that type of attack. Every five minutes, Palo Alto updates the list of phishing websites. You can set up a profile to ensure that if anybody tries to access such a website, whether it be Http or https, then the attempt will be blocked.

Palo Alto will automatically monitor the contents of POST messages and check to see if they contain credentials such as a username and password. If they do then it may indicate an attempt to steal credentials by an external site. The traffic will be blocked, the incident will be reported, and the admin will be notified.

This solution makes the lives of security admins very easy in cases, as an example, for configuring IPS. If you want to secure traffic between any two zones, we need to make sure that the applications are identified, the users are identified, and all of the security profiles are applied. These including antivirus, anti-spyware, and IPS. This solution makes the configuration very easy.

Each firewall is treated as a security sensor where the firewall talks to the cloud and a machine running artificial intelligence helps to detect malware or other threats. This is an important step in the protection that this solution offers.

What needs improvement?

The dual WAN functionality is missing in this solution.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for almost two years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This solution is very stable. It is a mature solution with a mature operating system. I have one firewall that has been running since 2010, and it is still upgrading to the latest software and still working.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This solution scales well.

We have many more than forty customers who are using this solution. One is a university with twenty thousand students, and we have deployments in large banks, different branches of government, etc. There are many thousands and thousands of users who are being secured.

The demand is very high and the standards are improving. Data centers are booming, and customers are looking for more enhancement in their platforms.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support for this solution is awesome. However, I rarely open a case because their platform is very stable. Most of the cases are related to basic support, such as an RMA. I have seen other vendors like Fortinet or Cisco, where the enabling of a function means that you have to deal with support, and there are issues that come from that.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of this solution is very easy. The length of time for deployment depends on how many policies you have, but the basic configuration should not take more than one hour.

For policy tuning, you need to review and tune the devices. Palo Alto has several tools to help with migration from the legacy approach of port-based policies to application-based policies.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Initially, Palo Alto looks expensive, but if you dig deeper then you will find that it is very comparable, or even cheaper than other solutions. For example, if you are looking for a one-gig next-generation firewall then you will start looking at the Palo Alto 850. If you compare the price of this to Fortinet, Worksense, Forcepoint, or Sophos, then you will see that they offer three or four gig performance at half the price. However, it is not true.

The reason for this is that not all of the security features are enabled. When you enable them, the performance degrades by more than ninety percent, and I have seen this happen in many different scenarios. This means that for the Palo Alto 1GB, it actually means 1GB with all of the functionality enabled. For the other vendors, you will never see their datasheet with all of the functionality enabled for a real environment with real traffic. It is based on lab traffic. Because the reality is that the performance of Palo Alto is better, it means that the price is better. When you compare models using real performance, and you do the calculation, you will see that Palo Alto is very comparable.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We have worked with many, many vendors, and this is the most mature next-generation firewall in the market. The performance of Palo Alto is very predictable, unlike other vendors who are faking their datasheet in terms of high-performance numbers that are unrelated to a real network, or real traffic.

Palo Alto provides numbers that reflect what is happening when all of the security functions are enabled, whereas other vendors do not show their performance will all of the functionality enabled. In reality, they are better than others. At the end of the day you are buying a security device, and you don't want to turn off any of the functionality to enhance your performance. Palo Alto is designed from day zero for performance and security.

What other advice do I have?

This is the most mature next-generation firewall in the market and a solution that I strongly recommend.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from this solution is not to trust internet users. Whether it is regular users or employees, they do not like to be detected. They keep trying to work around the policies using different applications and peer-to-peer functionality. I have learned this because Palo Alto has full visibility to all types of traffic, and we're able to catch these scenarios and put security policies int place.

Palo Alto has done a lot towards closing gaps in security. Cloud security is not their only focus. It is concerned with the flows between VMs, storage, and containers. They are concerned with PCI requirements and compliance. They have also launched Cortex Analytics to help close gaps further. They are in a very good position to lead the future.

At the end of the day, everything is relative, and I would rate this solution a ten out of ten compared to other products. However, there is room for improvement.

Overall, I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner.
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Palo Alto Networks Panorama
January 2025
Learn what your peers think about Palo Alto Networks Panorama. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: January 2025.
831,265 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Olajide Olusegun - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Team Lead at Atlas Security
MSP
Top 5Leaderboard
Centralized management and monitoring of Palo Alto firewalls, giving detailed status of the devices, reports on data, logs and events of the firewalls.
Pros and Cons
  • "A valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is reporting because it gives you different reports on data, logs, and threats. I also like the centralized firewall management feature of the product."
  • "A bottleneck in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the licensing. The licensing model for the product is complicated. Another area for improvement is the PDF report generation because you'll notice that it's missing some details."

What is our primary use case?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is similar to Cisco FMC, for centralized management and monitoring of multiple Palo Alto firewalls. You can push your configuration from Palo Alto Networks Panorama to all your Palo Alto Networks firewalls. You then receive different data reports, threat reports, threat logs, and system logs. You don't need to log into each firewall to get that information or configure it because you can see or do it all in Palo Alto Networks Panorama. If there is any issue or link failure, you'll find that information on Palo Alto Networks Panorama, so the product is best for the centralized management of firewalls.

How has it helped my organization?

For a few projects, we used Palo Alto Panorama to manage the firewalls.

What is most valuable?

A valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is reporting because it gives you different reports on data, logs, and threats. It has easy policy management and control, NAT, PBF, decryption, and visibility.

I also like the centralized firewall management feature of the product.

The technical support for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is responsive.

What needs improvement?

A bottleneck in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the licensing. The pricing and licensing model for the product is expensive and can be complicated, or it could be because I'm more familiar with Cisco licensing, which I find brilliant and easy, compared to Panorama licensing, which could be hell.

Another area for improvement in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is report generation.

It is expensive and suitable mostly in big enterprise environment.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for nine years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is a scalable solution.

How are customer service and support?

The technical support team for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is very responsive. The support staff will call you even after the case is closed, asking you how the support was and that he hopes the same issue doesn't resurface. Panorama support is excellent.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

I found the initial setup for Palo Alto Networks Panorama easy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is more expensive than its counterpart Cisco FMC, although I have some clients who don't care about the budget but care more about extra features.

What other advice do I have?

Recently, my company upgraded the version of Palo Alto Networks Panorama for one of the clients, version 10.0.

If you are using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for the first time, I'll advise you not to use it if you only have one to two firewalls or if you only have a small environment. Better use the product if you have four to six firewalls and want centralized management.

I'll also tell you that Palo Alto Networks Panorama requires a higher level of technicality, so you must study a lot before using it. It would be best to familiarize yourself with licensing, threat protection, decryption policies, app override, DoS protection, etc. Still, I can say that Palo Alto Networks Panorama is an excellent product to use.

My rating for the product is eight out of ten.

I'm a customer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
PeerSpot user
reviewer1278348 - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Engineer at a tech vendor with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Has good stability and a straightforward setup
Pros and Cons
  • "Palo Alto Networks Panorama has good stability. I didn't see any instability from it, and its initial setup was straightforward."
  • "My company's getting whatever it needs from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud, there's an issue with CPU management, and that's an area for improvement. Though the normal data traffic doesn't go through the management interface, whenever there's an increase in the throughput, CPU management becomes high. If you increase the load, CPU management spikes, and it's what needs to be taken care of in Palo Alto Networks Panorama."

How has it helped my organization?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has improved the way my company works, which is why my company uses it.

What is most valuable?

What I like about Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that it's stable and setting it up isn't complex.

What needs improvement?

My company's getting whatever it needs from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud, there's an issue with CPU management, and that's an area for improvement. Though the normal data traffic doesn't go through the management interface, whenever there's an increase in the throughput, CPU management becomes high. If you increase the load, CPU management spikes, and it's what needs to be taken care of in Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for the past four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has good stability. I didn't see any instability from it, though at times, the CPU goes high in terms of usage, and that's what you need to take care of.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a scalable solution.

How are customer service and support?

Technical support for Palo Alto Networks Panorama, in my experience, was initially good, but now the wait time is longer. My company has a dedicated account manager, so it gets support, but in general, the response time is longer.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup for Palo Alto Networks Panorama was straightforward. I didn't see any complexity. It was a normal firewall configuration. I haven't done any new deployment of Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud environment, it didn't take much time for me, and you can complete a setup within one to two hours.

What about the implementation team?

We implemented Palo Alto Networks Panorama through a vendor team by Palo Alto, specifically for the on-premises deployment, to migrate from Check Point to Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud environment, as it is a VM, we did it ourselves.

What other advice do I have?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is deployed everywhere, particularly in the public cloud and on-premises as well.

My company is just a customer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but because it's a big company, it has a dedicated account manager in Palo Alto.

My company uses the solution extensively. There are more than six Panoramas. Forty to fifty firewalls are managed currently through Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

I'm rating Palo Alto Networks Panorama nine out of ten. It's a good solution. What would make my rating a ten is if the CPU management spike issue was addressed and if the delayed response of technical support was addressed as well. A few years ago, the response time from support was immediate, but now, there's a delay with the response, even though my company has a dedicated account manager from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, and this makes you think about a midsized company with no account manager in terms of how much time it gets a response from Palo Alto support.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
reviewer1267500 - PeerSpot reviewer
Director, Compliance and Risk Management at a pharma/biotech company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Sophisticated and robust prevention that is relatively easy to setup even in complex environments
Pros and Cons
  • "The product features allow the capacity to take effective, advanced security measures."
  • "The product could use some method of allowing for more customization and open integration with other controls."

What is our primary use case?

My obligations consist of overseeing cyber threat intelligence, threat defense operation, digital forensic incident response, and data loss prevention. So in the context of endpoint solutions, my position pertains mainly to the DLP (data loss prevention) function.  

Cisco AMP (Advanced Malware Protection) plays a significant role in our perimeter strategy for protecting the infrastructure. I work primarily with making sure that we have indicators of compromise in Cisco AMP. I am not on the network engineering or network operations side of things. I am mainly a consumer of services from those particular groups.  

We use Snort rules (open source network intrusion detection system [NIDS]). We use Yara rules (Yet Another Recursive/Ridiculous Acronym, rules for malware identification). We have Palo Alto IPSs (Intrusion Prevention Systems).  

Our use cases are primarily perimeter-based for runtime malware defense.  

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the management features like the ACL (Access Control List) management. These give us the capacity to make effective use of the capabilities of the product.   

What needs improvement?

Pricing is always something that consumers hope will be addressed in their favor. I think that some method of allowing for more customization and open integration with other controls within the enterprise is something that we want to have. We want to be able to have more orchestration of disparate parts.  

I think the features that most of the features that I would like to see are currently being implemented. Behavioral heuristic analysis of connections, for example. That is something that I know is being done now.  

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Networks Panorama for a couple of years now.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability is good. If you consider the size of our organization and the number of users that can verge on being impressive.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

I have good impressions of the scalability of this solution. We have not really had any issue scaling the usage.  

How are customer service and technical support?

The tech support is actually pretty good. In general, they address issues in a timely manner with reasonable responses.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

My team has not previously used any different solutions in this company, but I have definitely, in the past, used other solutions. It is really necessary for the evaluation of product capabilities.  

How was the initial setup?

The installation was straightforward in a complex environment. That means that we could have had far more issues were the product not well-designed from an installation standpoint. We are a big organization. Deployment can be a matter of weeks or it could be a matter of months depending on what jurisdiction the installation happens to be in.  

What about the implementation team?

We have various partners and consultants that we work with in addition to having expensive competencies in-house. We do not often have a reason to go beyond the network of expertise that we have established.  

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anyone considering Networks Panorama is to thoroughly research the competitive landscape. Do your Gartner research. Make sure you develop a set of requirements — a feature matrix that you can use to compare your requirements with the functionality offered by the various solutions under consideration. There are a lot of solutions out there and the goal would be to pick the one that best fits your situation rather than just one that someone recommends.  

On a scale of one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate this product as an eight-of-ten considering the knowledge and insight I have into it now.  

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Hybrid Cloud
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
Darshan Divekar - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Technical Manager -Information Technology at a computer software company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
High availability, scalable, and good support
Pros and Cons
  • "Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable."
  • "Palo Alto Networks Panorama has some bugs that could be fixed."

What is our primary use case?

We are using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for security and access controls.

What needs improvement?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has some bugs that could be fixed.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for approximately one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good.

We have less than 100 people using this solution in my organization.

How are customer service and support?

I have used the support from Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

I rate the support from Palo Alto Networks Panorama an eight out of ten.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is of a medium level of difficulty.

What about the implementation team?

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

There is a license needed to use Palo Alto Networks Panorama. The cost is not that important, what is important is meeting all the requirements and security features.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

We decided to use Palo Alto Networks Panorama over other solutions because we have the strategy sheet which defines our requirements, and our requirements were mostly met. We have a standardized service we want to deliver when it comes to a firewall we use Palo Alto Networks Panorama, if we use load balancers, we use F5, and for networks, we use Cisco. We have certain things that are already defined as a criterion for us to follow.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to others is if this solution fits their use case then they should use it.

I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama an eight out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
PeerSpot user
Sr. Systems Analyst at a manufacturing company with 5,001-10,000 employees
Real User
It can manage devices in groups based on their use. The application ID capabilities have been useful for things like Active Directory.
Pros and Cons
  • "Firewalls: The application ID capabilities have been very useful for things like Active Directory, and not having to identify every port that Microsoft has decided to use."
  • "The ability to add scheduled jobs would be a significant improvement. Panorama has the ability to push out OS updates, but it would be nice to be able to schedule those updates so not to affect the site during normal business hours."

What is most valuable?

Panorama: Provides a central management capability for all of the firewalls. It has the ability to manage the devices in groups based on their use. We use the firewalls in two primary functions and the ability to provide management of the different groups of firewalls is very useful.

Firewalls: The application ID capabilities have been very useful for things like Active Directory, and not having to identify every port that Microsoft has decided to use.

How has it helped my organization?

I can’t say that it has significantly improved the functions of the organization over the firewalls that we were previously using. The addition of a good central management capability has helped improve the management of the firewalls, but the functions for the service that is provided to the users has not significantly changed.

What needs improvement?

Panorama: The ability to add scheduled jobs would be a significant improvement. Panorama has the ability to push out OS updates, but it would be nice to be able to schedule those updates so not to affect the site during normal business hours.

Firewalls:

  • (1) App-ID is good, but could be better. We use off ports for some common services and App-ID does identify the application correctly, but the rule allowing the traffic does not allow the traffic without adding the ports to the rule. This negates the need for App-ID in the rule. If App-ID worked as I think it should, we would use it and then block the common port.
  • (2) Integration with Microsoft Active Directory incurs significant additional traffic across the WAN circuits. We have a number of GCs across our environment and the configuration of Active Directory in the firewalls requires significant communications to all of the GCs across our environment. We were seeing the firewalls generate around 500kb of WAN traffic communicating with all of the GCs. After reviewing the configuration with Palo Alto support, the config was correct. While we do want to be able to use the User-ID functionality of the firewalls, that kind of overhead is not acceptable.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using Panorama and the PAN FWs for just over one year.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

So far we have not seen any issues with stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have not run into any issues with scalability.

How are customer service and technical support?

Technical support with Palo Alto has been very good and responsive.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We previously were using Cisco ASA devices. The switch was made based on central management and the NGFW functions. The timing was in the middle of Cisco delivering their NGFW functionality. The other issue that led to the move was when Cisco presented their recommended replacement for the existing devices, they recommended their Meraki line with Internet management, which was not in line with our requirements for many of our more sensitive firewalls.

How was the initial setup?

Initial setup is very easy. After working with a few new installations we were able to put together a script to apply the new firewalls to setup the management access, Panorama location, high availability (HA) configuration and the initial IP stack. This makes it easy to start the OS updates and initial rules from Panorama. By having the HA setup scripted, it also makes the OS updates a single download instead of a download for each device. The HA connection allows the firewalls to copy the OS over to the other firewall with the single download. That is important because there are several large downloads necessary to update the OS to the current OS levels.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is high compared to other vendors in the same space. Licensing is also fairly high for different functions to be added on, like Intrusion detection/prevention, user VPN, URL filtering. Some firewall vendors offer the “additional” licensing/functions as part of their license for the device and then others offer it like Palo Alto.

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

The original decision was made by a different group within the company. The re-evaluation included Cisco ASA, Cisco Meraki, Fortinet and Palo Alto.

What other advice do I have?

Talk to other customers. Start with the ones recommended by the vendor, but also in forums as well. Everyone understands that recommended customers are handpicked and forums can be contain spurned customers. But if you look for information regarding specific functions that you need, you can find more useful information. Make sure if you hear something glowing from a vendor recommended customer about a function, check on that function online.

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
PeerSpot user
KUMAR-SAIN - PeerSpot reviewer
Senior Network Security Engineer at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Allows us to centrally manage devices and captures any spyware or vulnerabilities
Pros and Cons
  • "It's easy to deploy any software or policies."
  • "I would like to see remote VPN, like the Cisco client."

What is our primary use case?

This solution allows us to centrally manage all devices. It's deployed on-premises.

There are 10,000 employees in my organization. We have two or three data centers across the globe.

What is most valuable?

It's easy to deploy any software or policies. Even if you have multiple devices across the globe, if you have urgent searching or maybe policy enforcement, you can do it easily.

The interface is easy to understand and manage. It's an intelligent device and can capture any spyware or vulnerabilities.

It's a leader in the market, and they observe the market requirement and upgrade the software accordingly.

What needs improvement?

The price could be lower. I would like to see remote VPN, like the Cisco client.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been working with Panorama for four years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Panorama is stable.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It's scalable.

How was the initial setup?

Setup isn't simple, but it's easy to migrate from another vendor.

Right now, we use 40 employees to manage the solution.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Cost-wise, it's very expensive. If you want to go with another vendor, Cisco and Fortinet are good for medium-size networks.

I would rate the cost 4 out of 5.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
PeerSpot user
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Palo Alto Networks Panorama Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.
Updated: January 2025
Buyer's Guide
Download our free Palo Alto Networks Panorama Report and get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions.