What advice do you have for others considering Palo Alto Networks Panorama?

I would recommend this solution to customers, though it can be very expensive. As an alternative, Fortinet solutions are also recommended. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Panorama has a lot of issues accessing and configuring the firewall or deploying the firewall from Panorama. I'd rate the solution five out of ten.

Palo Alto has one of the best portfolios in the market if we need a very stable environment to manage the information security space for our organization or our client's organization in firewalling, application-level firewalling, and contextual-based firewalling. We can also look at Check Point as an option. The vendor has AI incorporated into their new offerings. Generally, behavior analysis has to be more automated rather than manual. With AI incorporated, the back-end OS can understand and easily detect certain vectors, like the zero-day attack. It's in a very early stage. It'll take quite some time for Palo Alto to scale AI to the level where the entire thing can be automated. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Overall, I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama as an eight out of ten.

I highly recommend Palo Alto Networks Panorama. It is a mature, solid, and innovative technology. Overall, I would rate it as a ten out of ten.

The suitability of Palo Alto products and their pricing depends on the size and the requirements of the company. It would not be a good fit for smaller companies with a limited number of firewalls. For larger companies with multiple clusters or complex configurations, Palo Alto products are highly recommended due to their comprehensive range of features and capabilities. I would rate it nine out of ten.

I would tell those planning to buy the product that if you really need those features and you are able to afford the price, go for it because it will probably be hard to get by any other product with the same features. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

I recommend this solution unless you're in a location with a lot of power cuts. If you work for a software company, I'll always recommend this solution. If you're looking for a stand-alone deployment, then I would recommend Fortinet. I rate this solution nine out of 10.

If the use case fits the solution then it will work very well. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama eight out of ten.

We use five people for the maintenance of the solution. The solution is easy to use and superior to other competitors. Additionally, there are occasional graphical or visual glitches that also take a while for them to address through updates. The length of time it takes to resolve these issues depends on their severity. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten. The solution is good compared to the competition, but the support is not up to standard.

My company works with Palo Alto Networks Panorama, including other Palo Alto Networks solutions, such as MDR, NGFW, and SOAR. My company is a system integrator rather than the end customer. My company provides and sells Palo Alto Networks Panorama to end customers. Palo Alto Networks Panorama is deployed on-premises, particularly by customers in the government. A state data center where my company deployed Palo Alto Networks Panorama had fifteen thousand to eighteen thousand users. The number of firewalls was eighty, with two Palo Alto Networks systems. My rating for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is nine out of ten.

I was a customer and end-user. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We're partners. We handle pre-sales and implementation of the solution for clients. It's a good product. However, if a company wants to deploy the solution, it should first do a proper study and design it properly. Otherwise, they will likely run into issues. I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I would recommend that new users study the product. I think people should use it because it is very easy to understand. I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.

I would tell people considering this product that you always have the support of Palo Alto. They can be plan B just in case something happens while configuring a new device, for example, to ensure everything gets configured the way it should be at the beginning. I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten.

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.

I am working for an official distributor of Palo Alto Networks. It is on-premises, and it has cloud abilities too. Public cloud deployments are available. I can recommend the solution to new users and suggest, firstly, that they choose their mode of Panorama. They need to decide if they will deploy in a public cloud or maybe on-premises. If you have a lot of Palo Alto devices, you will need Panorama. If you have this significant amount of Palo Alto Network devices, when you get Panorama, you will get a lot of features that will make your life easier. I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I would rate Panorama as an eight out of ten.

It's doing its job for us. Since we cut it out, from Checkpoint to Palo Alto, everything has improved noticeably. I recommend it. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

All my clients are happy and satisfied with the solution. We can strongly recommend it to others. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

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.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to others. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama an eight out of ten

I've been dealing with version 10.0 of Palo Alto Networks Panorama. I'm a reseller of this solution. One person could do the deployment and maintenance for Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but what we do in our office is: we have a buddy system. If there's a change that needs to be made, e.g. if someone does the work, someone verifies it, and then catches any problems there, because if you're managing several firewalls, one more change might break all of them. That's the risk that you're in. My advice to others who are planning to implement Palo Alto Networks Panorama is to look at the use case, e.g. if you have two firewalls, or if you have several firewalls across the country, it's best to get a specialist in to help you deploy it. For a regular IT guy who works in a company managing the server, etc., it'll be such a hard learning curve to go through. Try and learn it yourself if you can, but if not, always defer to a specialist. I'm rating Palo Alto Networks Panorama seven out of ten, just because it's quite difficult.

I have worked with FortiGate and Palo Alto. Both are quite similar but I have experienced more bugs in FortiGate compared to Palo Alto. Both products have the same functionality, although FortiGate does have more features. Palo Alto has rule optimizers, reporting and many other capabilities built in and so other products (such as FortiGate or Check Point) do not need to be used with this solution. This is what makes Pal Alto affordable compared to other solutions. Compared to other firewalls, this is the most reliable solution. I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

When implementing, make sure someone involved has a good technical understanding of the product and how it will work. I would rate this solution as nine out of ten.

Be prepared for simple. It is not complicated. You're up and running in 10 minutes, so you'll be surprised. It is only for Palo Alto products, so you can't scale it to anything else. It does what it is designed to do, which is to manage Palo Alto firewalls and other Palo Alto equipment. I would rate it a 10 out of 10. It is a pretty simple platform; it is just the UI that can be made a little more intuitive. That's it.

We are in EDR. We don't sell any products or any information for threat intelligence. If they have Palo Alto products, and multiple sites, it's definitely something they would need. It is difficult to give it a ten because there is always room for development. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

It is easy if you're used to managing firewalls. Using Panorama to manage the firewalls is not rocket science. It is just another GUI or web UI. Palo Alto is really good at innovation, adding new functions and features, and rolling those out on a regular basis. So, they're going in the right direction. As long as that keeps happening, they are good. They should just keep adding and improving. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of 10.

I would recommend this solution to other users who are interested in using it. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a ten out of ten.

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

I'm just a customer. I'm using the latest version of the solution. I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to others if you have multiple sites and you want to manage them centrally. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

I would advise those wanting to implement this solution that is pretty straightforward, and Palo Alto has written very detailed documentation on their website. If you go through that it is very easy to deploy. You will not run into any issues if you follow the documentation. I recommend this solution to others. I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a seven out of ten.

I would recommend this solution. It is the best in the class. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

We are just customers and end-users. We don't have a business relationship with the organization. I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's been very useful for our organization and we've been quite happy with its capabilities. It is a next-generation firewall, and therefore you can use it for a lot of requirements, and lots of solutions. I would highly recommend it.

I would recommend this solution to others. It is a good solution. If any environment has multiple gateways, such as 50 or 100 gateways, it is good to have Panorama. If you have only one or two gateways of Palo Alto, you can easily manage them individually without having Panorama. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

We are Palo Alto partners. I believe I am using a variation of version nine from Panorama. I've deployed the solution on a virtual machine, however, I've never deployed it to the cloud. I'd recommend the solution to others. Overall, I would rate it at a seven on a scale from one to ten.

In order to have the right security level, you need to understand how decryption works or is used in Palo Alto. We had to clarify some points with them related to how decryption works. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

I would recommend this solution to other interested companies. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Palo Alto Networks Panorama a rating of nine.

I would recommend this solution. I would rate it a ten out of ten.

I would advise studying and understanding the best factors for implementing Palo Alto Networks Panorama and creating a roadmap to use all the features because it is not a cheap solution. Understand the possible ways to implement Palo Alto Networks Panorama and create a roadmap that implements all the features. Palo Alto is constantly improving its solutions. They have been doing a great job and putting a great effort into their products. I would rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten. We are satisfied with the solution.

My advice to anybody who is looking at this solution is that it is easy and straightforward to use, although more difficult than some to deploy. It is expensive but if you can afford it, then it's worth it. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with the company. We have multiple variants of the solution's model. Currently, we are using 8.1.15-H. We also have some virtual firewalls that are recently in Tokyo. We are using close to around 800+ Palo Alto firewalls. We're currently developing our virtual firewalls and have them in different locations. It is not just Palo Alto. We have other devices as well, so we have close to around 1300 plus firewall devices. I would recommend the solution to others. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. If you need a perimeter type of device, Check Point may be a better option. However, for my businesses, I would choose Palo Alto due to its scalability and user-friendliness. It also has great security features. That said, if it didn't release so many new updates, I would rate it higher, simply due to the fact that so many upgrades requires a lot of work on our part.

Implementing Palo Alto Panorama is something I would strongly recommend for people who are considering it that have a need for this kind of security solution. It makes your life a lot easier in building a robust security response. On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate this product overall as a nine-out-of-ten. If they fix the integration, that would bring it up pretty much right to a ten-of-ten at least for now.

We're just a customer. We don't have a business relationship with Palo Alto. I'm not sure of which version of the solution I'm using. I've worked with many versions, including both newer and older ones. We use multiple deployment models. We use both cloud and on-premises deployments. In general, I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. It's worked well for us and we don't believe there's anything feature-wise that is really missing. I'd rate the solution, on a scale from one to ten, at an eight. Of course, if it was less expensive and had a more stable performance, I'd mark it higher.

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.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10.

We're a reseller of Palo Alto. We're currently using the most up to date version of the solution at our organization. I would advise companies considering using the solution to go through the training before setting out on implementing anything. New users should maybe be somewhat familiar with it before they do the installation, just so that they can familiarize themselves with how it works. It's not difficult, however, you just don't want to go at it without having some understanding of where things are located. It will make the setup much easier. I would rate the solution nine out of ten overall. It's a very solid product from a management perspective. Often companies will try to oversell how great their product is, however, in this case, it's true. It's very good.

My advice to others who are looking into implementing it, I would say that the solution is practically completely perfect. It gets a ten out of ten rating from me.

I would recommend the solution. I find Palo Alto is the easiest product to deploy. I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

I would recommend this solution.

I will recommend this solution to others because it is a good solution, but only if you are using multiple files and not only two or three files. You should have at least five files for this solution to be right for you. I rate this product an eight out of ten. Easier implementation with other solutions will increase my rating. In the future, I would like to see additional features being able to install firewalls using remote sites and the ability to do initial configuration using Panorama. I would like this initial configuration to be copied on USP and have the firewalls configured to connect to the Panorama. I would, therefore, like to see easier configuration and implementation in the next version.

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.

Most of our clients deal with the on-premises deployment solution, as cloud solutions in Egypt can occasionally be insecure. I would advise anyone looking to implement the solution really focus on sizing before beginning the implementation. I would rate the solution nine out of ten.

We are using the private cloud deployment model. I would recommend the solution. It has a user-friendly interface. It's stable. You can easily troubleshoot any issue. You will also get clear information, and, in general, it's a very good product that allows you to manage more than one device from a central interface. Of course, before you do any change, I would recommend that you back up everything first. I would rate the solution seven out of ten.

If you are looking at getting a Palo Alto firewall, then you should probably at least look into Panorama. Because if you start out just putting in firewalls and you don't have this, you will be kicking yourself that you didn't have this from day one. If you have just one firewall out there, maybe you don't need it. However, if you have two or three, then you should probably get it to be in front of a lot of the features which you will want eventually. It is pretty solid product. Our security program is fairly immature compared to other enterprises, and this product has definitely helped us lock down things. We have a rigorous code review process. Therefore, we are always back a bunch of versions. If the latest version came out today with new features on it, we probably wouldn't get to that for quite a while. There are only certain things that you can do within the Panorama solution.

Ensure you get professional services with the tool. We are very satisfied with everything that they provides us. This product has significantly helped with implementing new leadership strategy, getting metrics, and being able to actually assign a risk floor.