Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication.
Senior Information Technology Consultant at Firstpoint Poland
Consultant
2022-07-19T10:18:00Z
Jul 19, 2022
The product or service could be improved by ensuring the current firmware works as well as the one in the old model. For example, with the old model, we only needed to restart it once in a while. However, with the new model and the new firmware, there is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working. I'm unsure what additional features could be included in the next release because we manage it quite well from the current systems and can reset it as needed.
Co-founder and Chief Operating Officer at a tech company with 11-50 employees
Real User
2020-03-05T08:39:00Z
Mar 5, 2020
The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations.
The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier. The solution should offer better monitoring, like Palo Alto, which uses the monitoring feature to help you find a problem. Palo Alto also offers a packet tracer to give you the opportunity to test your configuration before you use it. That way, you can try a configuration you are not sure about it. Fortinet, in my opinion, can do more at this point.
Fortinet FortiExtender is a cost-effective hardware WAN device that is robust, easily scales, and delivers 5G, LTE, and Ethernet options. FortiExtender is designed using Fortinet’s trademark security-focused networking. The solution enables organizations to have enhanced secure network connectivity with cellular and wired broadband network options.
FortiExtender can be used for secure point of sale (POS) systems to transport fleet communications. The device delivers dependable broadband...
The support could be faster and more responsive.
We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive.
Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication.
The product or service could be improved by ensuring the current firmware works as well as the one in the old model. For example, with the old model, we only needed to restart it once in a while. However, with the new model and the new firmware, there is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working. I'm unsure what additional features could be included in the next release because we manage it quite well from the current systems and can reset it as needed.
I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients.
The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations.
The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier. The solution should offer better monitoring, like Palo Alto, which uses the monitoring feature to help you find a problem. Palo Alto also offers a packet tracer to give you the opportunity to test your configuration before you use it. That way, you can try a configuration you are not sure about it. Fortinet, in my opinion, can do more at this point.