SonicWall TZ Reviews

The purpose of SonicWall is as a unified threat management appliance. We use SonicWall to protect our customers from cyber threat.

We have SonicWall in customer's on-premises environment and we have SonicWall in cloud data centers.

We like the central interface and we like the security features. Additionally, we use SonicWall with VPN connectivity and we have had no problems with SonicWall all these years.

In the next release, I would like to see a SonicWall integration with the DLP tool, this would be interesting. Data Loss Prevention integration.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for about 10 years.

SonicWall TZ is a stable solution.

In terms of scalability, we have to choose the right model according to the customer, their company's size, and according to the internet link capacity. Also according to the quantity of user parameters and the user quantity. The number of users and the link capacity are two parameters to define which SonicWall model is appropriate for that company.

They have a good technical support. I have no problem with them.

It is easy to set up SonicWall. It just depends on the scope of the project.

To set up for initial use takes about two hours. We start with the basic configuration and that is enough to start using SonicWall. After that, we do the more complex and detailed configuration of the security features.

Since we can deploy SonicWall in two hours with the basic configuration, we do a fast start because my users are starting to use the web and receive emails. After that, we do the next steps of the complex config for the more detailed secured configurations.

I would recommend SonicWall to other companies for their security, for the end customer and for security companies, to use as a UTM appliance. 

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate SonicWall TZ a nine.

We use SonicWall TZ for firewall and security services.

I like the firewall product, the security server, and the content filter.

The price could be better for us in Bolivia.

SonicWall TZ is very stable.

SonicWall TZ is scalable. 

Technical support is very good. 

The initial setup is very easy. Enterprises just need one person to maintain this solution. But for reseller support, we have two engineers and two specialists to help the engineers.

The price could be better for us in Bolivia. 

I will tell potential users that I think it's a great product. With the new version, you also have more facilities and more features to protect your infrastructure. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonicWall TZ a ten.

We use only the latest version. 

We use the solution for CFS, app control and in respect of integrated IAD users. 

The solution boasts good performance and is easy to use. 

The solution should provide some additional ports. Currently, we have only four to five of these.

We have been using SonicWall TZ for around five to six years.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Tech support is knowledgeable when it comes to clarifying a technical issue. 

Installation takes a maximum of 30 minutes. There is a default template. 

One only need register the firewall, upgrade the latest firmware and select that template. It will automatically configure the template.

We have two teams that are responsible for the deployment and maintenance.

We have around 20 clients making use of the solution. 

We purchase the firewalls, distribute and implement them for our clients. We are implementers. 

I would definitely recommend the solution to others.

I rate SonicWall TZ as a ten out of ten. 

We use SonicWall directly with on-premise site filtering and BPM. Now we're using monitoring tools from SonicWall to get control of the clientside and help them remotely. That's most of the cases we are using.

We like their interface very much. It's pretty easy to use. 

There is a point I don't like about SonicWall in the past and now. Most of the destinations we look at when we're detecting some user using too much bandwidth or something like that, SonicWall just gave us the destination IP address instead of the full qualified domain name. I think that's the most important part that is still missing. I think that's the most important thing for us.

The fully qualified domain name is very good flexible information. We can detect issues on each page, so we don't have to wonder a lot about other tools. It would also help if there was a simple way to log in the users, which is one login from Windows Active Directory, without having to deploy patch information or using external tools like SSO. 

I have been using SonicWall TZ for about ten years now.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonicWall TZ a nine.

We use the solution for internet access, content filtering, point-to-point tunnels, and bandwidth management.

The most valuable features have been content filtering, and the interface is easy to navigate and to use.

The log sections could be done more clearly.

I would like there to be the ability to manage content filtering on a per-user basis or by using the application as we normally would for all users. Currently, it is applied to a group of users and I do not think it is reliable or performing as good as it should.

I have been using this solution for approximately 12 years.

I have found this solution reliable and stable.

The solution is scalable. Our client's user usage sizes vary. We have clients with five to 200 users using the solution. The number of connections is not limited and there is always room for expansion.

The technical support is excellent.

We previously used Microsoft before SonicWall. We switched because this solution has more features, such as embedded content filtering.

The initial setup is easy.

If you are not using a vendor or implementation team it can take a maximum of three hours for a medium-size company of 50 users.

The price is fair for the solution for the quality you receive.

I would recommend this solution because it is easy to use and the configuration is simple.

I rate SonicWall TZ an eight out of ten.

Our clients use it for VPN, firewall, antivirus, and content filtering purposes. We have its latest version.

Content filtering and application rules are the most valuable features. It is also easy to configure.

Its pricing can be better. It is very expensive.

I have been using this solution for around ten years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. I didn't have any issues with scalability. Our clients are small organizations with 20 to 40 users.

Their technical support is very good. I also like its documentation, which is easy to access.

Our clients have been using different solutions, such as pfSense, and they migrate to SonicWall TZ because it has more security.

Its initial setup is simple. The duration depends on the number of users and configuration, but it usually takes around 12 hours. We have three or four people for its deployment.

Its price is very high, which makes it difficult to convince the clients to buy this solution.

I would recommend this solution for implementing security. I am satisfied with this solution. It meets our expectations.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a nine out of ten.

We use SonicWall for the connectivity it provides. We are customers of SonicWall and I work in network support.

The VPN connection is the most valuable feature for us. For me, it's all good - implementation and data tools are also good.

The GUI interface could be improved. It would make a difference if they could update that. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

I've had some problems with the VPN connection but I think stability is good.

Most of our clients are small companies but the scalability is good. 

I've had good experience with technical support. 

The initial setup was easy for me. 

I also use Fortinet FortiGate and I prefer it to SonicWall. The difference is that SonicWall is a cheaper solution. 

I would recommend this product, I haven't had any problems with it. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

Our company provides consultancy services. We are resellers and integrators, and we implement this solution for our customers. I'm a systems engineer.

The solution is important for the main security program of our client companies. 

I like the site categorization and application controls, and I also like the anti-spam feature.

The user interface could be improved. Another issue is that part of the company strategy is that once the license expires, the company blocks features and things slow down. It would be nice if they would provide a free version for small companies. Most companies here in Brazil either don't have the money or their culture is cost-oriented so they don't make large investments in security. They prefer products which are less expensive such as open, source-based firewalls. Having access to a free version would mean that we could create an awareness within the company about the importance of these solutions. Because of the dollar rate, the product is quite expensive for us, whereas in the States it's affordable to spend a few thousand dollars on a solution. 

I've been using this product for six years. 

The solution is not very scalable. We often have to change the appliances. That's the downside on these kinds of projects because it then requires the company to make an additional purchase. Our clients usually have up to 400 users each. 

We don't like the technical support much. There is a long wait time to get a response. 

We also use Fortinet for our clients and we prefer that solution. Fortinet has a better user interface that's easier to use with no hardware charges. It's a more expensive solution but you get what you pay for. The graphical user interface is not so easy with SonicWall. Sophos also has a better user interface.

The initial setup is complex and takes a few hours. It really requires specialized technicians. If the user interface was easier it would be a little less complex to deploy. It means they need to contact companies like ours, but maybe they need to improve their in-house support. 

We think SonicWall is a good product. Sometimes the technicians don't have the expertise to deploy and there can be issues with appliances that are not sized correctly and the appliances get overloaded and it slows down the network. It's not because of the solution, it's the lack of experience.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10.