We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Its administrative panel is very intuitive and simple. It is simpler than the other solutions that we had. As an administrator, we are always looking for the easiest solution to manage network policies. We are able to filter everything on our network and also use the VPN feature, which is important these days when people are working remotely during COVID."
"The most valuable features are simplicity, management, and that it's constantly evolving."
"Its stability is the most valuable."
"Good anti-malware and web filtering features."
"Layer-3 firewall and routing are the most valuable features."
"The customization potential is quite impressive."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"It's an easy solution to set up."
"It prevents us from being hacked and delivers information about who and where the attack came from."
"In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."
"We switched to Meraki because it lets you see what's happening in your LAN and WAN in a graphic and web environment."
"The solution is good for load balancing."
"The security level of our organization has changed by using Meraki MX Firewalls. We didn't have the UTM before, but now we have sandboxing, tray scanning, attack preventions and monitorization. Our security level has improved."
"The internet traffic shaping has been very valuable."
"We've had no issues with the scalability or the stability of this solution"
"In terms of WAN optimization, it's completely cloud-controlled. Anyone can manage their network environment from a mobile phone."
"Embedding it into my application development lifecycle prevents data loss and business disruption, allowing the adoption to operate at the speed of my AWS Cloud."
"It ensures that every interaction, pre and post-loan processing, undergoes a thorough inspection, leveraging VPN features and comprehensive security protocols."
"It scales linearly with load and no issues."
"The VM series has an advantage over the physical version because we are able to change the sources that the machine has, such as the amount of available RAM."
"The solution strengthens our IT posture."
"It gives us the ease that we are secure. We have set up the proper things that help make our data safe."
"I have not actually called their support line, because we have a direct contact to a senior engineer in the company for any issues that we handle with them. I will say they are very responsive, and they do give you the information you need when you need it."
"You already can scale it if you put it in Auto Scaling groups. If you put it in a load balancer, it should already be able to scale."
"The firewall engine is not so strong as of now, in my opinion... My second concern is that, while they have Zero-day vulnerability and anti-malware features, the threat engine needs to be strengthened, its efficiency can be increased."
"The Wi-Fi controller needs a lot of improvement."
"You do need some IT knowledge in order to effectively work with the solution."
"Fortinet could improve the windows opener or the virtual IP solutions for opening windows. The virtual IP settings need improvement as firewalls are trending in new development directions."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"There is a lot of improvement needed with SSL-VPN."
"I'm not sure if it's something that they already have or are developing something, however, we need some dedicated features for container security."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"We can’t access GUI management and CLI opening features when the Internet is unavailable."
"Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution."
"Load balancing options and ability to manage a couple of Internet connections."
"Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. This will frustrate more advanced users at times."
"More detail needed for configuration of the VPN."
"It would be great if the Meraki devices let us see, in real time, the internet demand on a single device."
"We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick. Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that."
"It would be nice to get detailed logging information without third-party software."
"At the beginning of the implementation, we had some difficulties with the scripts, but Palo Alto Networks support together with a local partner finally fixed it."
"The implementation should be simplified."
"The product needs improvement in their Secure Access Service Edge."
"The solution's licensing could be improved, and training should be included before installation."
"The user interface could use some improvement."
"I would like to see a more thorough QA process. We have had some difficulties from bugs in releases."
"The disadvantage with Palo Alto is that they don't have a cloud-based solution that includes a secure web gateway."
"The tool is very costly."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 59 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 53 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Sophos UTM. See our Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
