Many customers are using Juniper routers and switches, which has prompted another team to work with Office 365. I am only working on the Juniper firewall part. The technical side is almost the same, and the function is similar with respect to other competitors. Juniper deployment is not very complex, but Cisco deployment is very complex. I recommend having a price and other comparison with Palo Alto and others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
The product has a good market in our country. Juniper’s MX1000 and other series have firewall and routing features. However, in other products, the firewall and routing feature is separated. Most Juniper devices combine routing switches and firewalls on a single platform. Overall, I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten.
I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, I would recommend Fortinet first because they cover all the endpoint protection, VPN protection and email protection. Second I would recommend Sophos, and third I would recommend Falcon.
I recommend looking elsewhere. I'm not particularly enamored with Juniper vSRX. I've had a lot of problems with it. We're looking to replace Juniper with either Aruba or FortiGate based on usability and affordability. Overall, I would rate this solution at four on a scale from one to ten.
Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
2022-01-12T16:57:44Z
Jan 12, 2022
My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is that the whole thing is about the design. If you design it well, consider how you should introduce it into your organization, and have a good implementor to ensure that it integrates well into the platforms you already have in place, then you won't have any problems with the implementation phase. Having a good integrator is very important. Feature-wise, this product isn't missing anything. There is nothing that we have asked for that isn't there. Our only complaint is about the reporting. I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.
Senior Network Planning Engineer at a comms service provider with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
2020-09-23T06:10:03Z
Sep 23, 2020
We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Juniper. I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. We'd recommend the solution to other organizations. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution an eight.
I would recommend Juniper vSRX. It works well for us. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper vSRX a rating of eight. We experienced some technical issues during implementation; if they were corrected, I would give this solution a rating of nine or ten.
Network Operations Support at EOS IT Management Solutions Ltd
MSP
2020-08-05T06:59:28Z
Aug 5, 2020
Our organization is partners with Juniper. We have a business relationship with them. At work I see it a lot, however, a lot of tasks are automated at work. It's not like you have hands-on from scratch experience. In my position, I'm doing more support or some automation to build the VRX or the virtuals needed for lab equipment. At home and in the labs I am able to learn from scratch, and I'm trying to connect VPNs, etc. I am hoping to get into the cloud in the future. The version of the solution we use should be the latest. I downloaded it a couple of months ago. It should be the latest, due to the fact that I have a virtual that's a trial. I get it through the partnership through my job. The virtual that I've got is on AWS. Azure is the recommended platform. I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten.
Network Security Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2020-07-27T07:17:00Z
Jul 27, 2020
I would rate Juniper an eight out of ten. In the next release, I would like to see an enhanced GUI, graphic user interface, because the graphic user interface is very bad. They should also discard some existing commands that we have to delete before the commands. Cisco is more practical. I would recommend Juniper because they have a very good product. Especially, the 5800 product is a very good product for an internet service provider.
Network Security Engineer at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Real User
2019-11-27T05:42:00Z
Nov 27, 2019
I would recommend Juniper because they have a good product, especially the 5800 version. This is a good product for internet service providers. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
Security Administrator at a comms service provider with 11-50 employees
Real User
2019-09-02T05:33:00Z
Sep 2, 2019
When we started with vSRX we came over from NetScreen. With vSRX We had a lot of problems and management was very hard to work with. It's not so very user-friendly. Before we had NetScreen 5400 and it was much better. We're in the process of migrating away from Juniper onto Fortinet. For us, it was not the correct solution for our data center. I would rate the solution six out of ten.
Senior Information Security Engineer at SOCIALEYEZ
Real User
2019-07-14T10:21:00Z
Jul 14, 2019
In Saudi Arabia, Juniper has a problem with marketing. They're less well known. A lot of companies are changing or going with Palo Alto. With the GUI, the firewall is not easy to use. It doesn't cover all the features. Juniper should enhance the GUI, and make it easier to use. Both the firewall and virtual security are hard to use. It's not easy to configure it and not friendly to users. I would advise for those thinking about using the product, to make sure they learn as much as possible, and also look to use a redundancy. I would rate this solution seven out of 10.
Network Engineer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
2019-07-07T06:35:00Z
Jul 7, 2019
I would recommend the solution and suggest you test it. It's a good product if you have a chance to work with it, if it fits right in your environment, it's really good to see what it can do. I would rate this solution at 8.5 out of 10. I would rate it as a 10 if I had the ability to create a highly available firewall and if there was more stability in the new features.
Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Real User
2019-07-02T11:47:00Z
Jul 2, 2019
On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a 10. When you've got a 10, there is nothing to improve. There's nothing to add. The pricing still needs some improvement.
Systems Analyst at a university with 10,001+ employees
Real User
2018-12-11T08:31:00Z
Dec 11, 2018
It works for us and has worked for other colleges and universities. We use just the on-premise version of the product. We are not on AWS yet. I'm looking forward to integrating this solution into AWS soon.
Look at this product and Palo Alto's product, then do a deep comparison analysis. It integrates with our VPC and Direct Connect Gateway. I am also using it on-premise. Compared to the AWS version, it is pretty transparent.
Firewalls are essential components of network security, acting as barriers between secure internal networks and potentially hazardous external connections. These tools monitor and control incoming and outgoing network traffic based on predetermined security rules.
Juniper vSRX is easy to manage and integrate. I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten.
Many customers are using Juniper routers and switches, which has prompted another team to work with Office 365. I am only working on the Juniper firewall part. The technical side is almost the same, and the function is similar with respect to other competitors. Juniper deployment is not very complex, but Cisco deployment is very complex. I recommend having a price and other comparison with Palo Alto and others. Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.
I rate the product a ten out of ten.
I recommend the solution to others and rate it an eight out of ten. It is a very inexpensive box and has good features as well.
The product has a good market in our country. Juniper’s MX1000 and other series have firewall and routing features. However, in other products, the firewall and routing feature is separated. Most Juniper devices combine routing switches and firewalls on a single platform. Overall, I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten.
I would recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the solution a nine on ten.
I rate this solution an eight out of ten. Regarding advice, I would recommend Fortinet first because they cover all the endpoint protection, VPN protection and email protection. Second I would recommend Sophos, and third I would recommend Falcon.
I rate this solution a seven out of ten, and I would recommend it to other people.
I would rate this solution 6 out of 10.
For those who can afford it afford it, I would recommend Palo Alto over Juniper. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
I recommend looking elsewhere. I'm not particularly enamored with Juniper vSRX. I've had a lot of problems with it. We're looking to replace Juniper with either Aruba or FortiGate based on usability and affordability. Overall, I would rate this solution at four on a scale from one to ten.
My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is that the whole thing is about the design. If you design it well, consider how you should introduce it into your organization, and have a good implementor to ensure that it integrates well into the platforms you already have in place, then you won't have any problems with the implementation phase. Having a good integrator is very important. Feature-wise, this product isn't missing anything. There is nothing that we have asked for that isn't there. Our only complaint is about the reporting. I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.
It depends on on the environment and work requirements so it is hard to give advice. I would rate Juniper vSRX at a seven on a scale of ten.
I can recommend Juniper vSRX to others who are looking at implementing it. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
We're just customers. We don't have a business relationship with Juniper. I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. We'd recommend the solution to other organizations. On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution an eight.
I would recommend Juniper vSRX. It works well for us. On a scale from one to ten, I would give Juniper vSRX a rating of eight. We experienced some technical issues during implementation; if they were corrected, I would give this solution a rating of nine or ten.
Our organization is partners with Juniper. We have a business relationship with them. At work I see it a lot, however, a lot of tasks are automated at work. It's not like you have hands-on from scratch experience. In my position, I'm doing more support or some automation to build the VRX or the virtuals needed for lab equipment. At home and in the labs I am able to learn from scratch, and I'm trying to connect VPNs, etc. I am hoping to get into the cloud in the future. The version of the solution we use should be the latest. I downloaded it a couple of months ago. It should be the latest, due to the fact that I have a virtual that's a trial. I get it through the partnership through my job. The virtual that I've got is on AWS. Azure is the recommended platform. I'd recommend the solution. I'd rate it ten out of ten.
I would rate Juniper an eight out of ten. In the next release, I would like to see an enhanced GUI, graphic user interface, because the graphic user interface is very bad. They should also discard some existing commands that we have to delete before the commands. Cisco is more practical. I would recommend Juniper because they have a very good product. Especially, the 5800 product is a very good product for an internet service provider.
I would recommend Juniper because they have a good product, especially the 5800 version. This is a good product for internet service providers. I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.
We use the on-premises deployment model. I would rate the solution seven out of ten.
When we started with vSRX we came over from NetScreen. With vSRX We had a lot of problems and management was very hard to work with. It's not so very user-friendly. Before we had NetScreen 5400 and it was much better. We're in the process of migrating away from Juniper onto Fortinet. For us, it was not the correct solution for our data center. I would rate the solution six out of ten.
In Saudi Arabia, Juniper has a problem with marketing. They're less well known. A lot of companies are changing or going with Palo Alto. With the GUI, the firewall is not easy to use. It doesn't cover all the features. Juniper should enhance the GUI, and make it easier to use. Both the firewall and virtual security are hard to use. It's not easy to configure it and not friendly to users. I would advise for those thinking about using the product, to make sure they learn as much as possible, and also look to use a redundancy. I would rate this solution seven out of 10.
I would recommend the solution and suggest you test it. It's a good product if you have a chance to work with it, if it fits right in your environment, it's really good to see what it can do. I would rate this solution at 8.5 out of 10. I would rate it as a 10 if I had the ability to create a highly available firewall and if there was more stability in the new features.
On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a 10. When you've got a 10, there is nothing to improve. There's nothing to add. The pricing still needs some improvement.
It works for us and has worked for other colleges and universities. We use just the on-premise version of the product. We are not on AWS yet. I'm looking forward to integrating this solution into AWS soon.
We are using both the on-premise and AWS versions. They are used for different purposes, so I can't compare them.
Look at this product and Palo Alto's product, then do a deep comparison analysis. It integrates with our VPC and Direct Connect Gateway. I am also using it on-premise. Compared to the AWS version, it is pretty transparent.