What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco ASA Firewall?

Cost-wise, it's in the same range as its competitors. It's likely cheaper than Palo Alto. Cisco is affordable for a large organization of 500 to 1,000 users and above. You need a Cisco sales partner or engineer to explain to you the licensing aspects. Out-of-the-box, Firepower is the module that you use to handle your network access policy for the end-user. It's a separate module that you need to include, it's not bundled. You need to ensure you have that subscription. A Cisco presales agent is key for you to know what you need. Once they understand your use cases, they'll be able to advise you about all the licenses you need. You need guidance. I wouldn't call it straightforward. With any Cisco product, you need a service level agreement and an active contract to maximize the support and the features. We have not had an active service contract. We just had the initial, post-implementation support. As a result, we've wasted a bit of time in terms of figuring out how best to troubleshoot things here and there. It would be best to ensure you are running an active contract with SLAs, at least with a Cisco partner. Also, we were not able to use its remote VPN capabilities, Cisco AnyConnect, because of a licensing limitation.

I think Cisco's price is in the right space now. They have discounts for customers at various levels. I think they're in the right spot. However, Cisco can be expensive when you factor in these additional features. If you add SecureX, Cisco's cost will definitely jump. We started with the standard ASA, then we added segmentation and micro-segmentation, and now we're talking about automation and unified architecture. SecureX is an integrated security portfolio. It gives a vertical and 360-degree algorithm with an open, integrated platform that can scale.

The pricing is fair.

The pricing for this solution is pretty fair.

Pretty much everything is included in the price for what we are using.

The pricing and licensing are getting more complicated, and I'd like that to be simpler.

The licensing is straightforward and simple, so we don't have to keep relicensing every year as we do with other applications.

The pricing was pretty comparable to other solutions when we purchased it.

It is more expensive than the other solutions.

I like its licensing because you buy the license once, and it is yours. We don't have to go for a subscription. So, I liked how they licensed Cisco ASA Firewall. Our clients are also very satisfied with its licensing model.

Its price is moderate. It is not too expensive.

When we bought it, it was really expensive. I'm not aware of the current pricing. We had problems with licensing. After our IPS subscription ended, we couldn't renew it because Cisco was moving to the next-generation firewall platform. So, they didn't provide us with the new license.

It is expensive. There is a cost for everything. There is per year license cost and support cost. There is also a cost for any training, any application, and any resource. Things are very costly to do with Cisco. Other brands are cheaper. They are also more flexible in terms of training, subscription, and licensing. They give lots and lots of years free. They provide more than Cisco.

The solution is quite expensive. Fortinet and other competitors are about half the price. Cisco is very expensive in comparison. They need to work to be more competitive.

Their pricing is very aggressive and good. Even a small company can afford it. I am happy with its pricing. Its licensing is on a yearly basis.

If you pay for the hardware, you get the Firepower and if you don't, then you get the Cisco Firewall.

It is affordable. The hardware is not that expensive anymore. It is a matter of licensing these days.

We sell Cisco ASA Firewall as a bundle — the price is very cheap. If a customer were to go for renewal direct from Cisco, then the price would be quite high.

We do need to purchase licenses. Those come from headquarters in Japan. They handle the details in terms of pricing. I'm not sure of the overall costs.

While I don't have the exact pricing of the solution, it's my understanding that Cisco is rather costly. It's not the cheapest option on the market. It's expensive. It's more costly, for example than Palo Alto.

We have a perpetual license for all of our firewalls. For some of the features, we purchase them on demand. The pricing is decent but it could always be cheaper, we would be happier.

The licensing is quite expensive. I don't have the exact amount, however, it's my understanding that it's a very pricey solution. There's a lot of competition out there, including from Fortigate, which offers just as good, if not better products.

Cisco ASA Firewall should be cheaper.

They have a lot of different models but most of them are really expensive. This is the main thing because, for us, the price is important.

This is an expensive product, although when you buy this solution, you can do many things so it provides good value for the investment.

I'm just handling the implementation and therefore don't have any insights on the pricing aspect of the solution. I wouldn't be able to say how much the company pays or if the pricing is high or low. That said, the pricing isn't an issue. It's more about what's best for the customer or the client. We want to give the client the best service, and very good protection. If a client begins to worry about pricing, we can't exactly guarantee the same level of safety.

The price is fair. It's not the cheapest, but it's not bad.

I just bought it off the shelf, and I'm using it with my previous one, so I have not spent that much.

There are licensing costs.

We're using the smart license for this firewall. The models that we have require licensing for remote access.

The product is very expensive.

They seem to be at the top end in terms of pricing, but they are worth the price. They are probably a little bit lower than Palo Alto. If the customers are relying on Cisco products and they are thinking more in terms of scaling to another layer in a year, it is pretty much in a good price range.

If we compare it with FortiGate and the co-existing ASA, FortiGate is better in terms of price.

This is an expensive product. We pay about €2,000 ($2,400 USD) per year for licensing. Technical support is in addition to the standard licensing fees.

In Laos, clients don't have much wiggle room when it comes to cost. The economy right now isn't very good. Most just choose the basic solution in order to avoid pricey licensing fees.

The product cost is a little high. It is a little bit on the high side, and it should be a little bit cost-friendly.

The pricing is neither cheap nor expensive. It's somewhere in the middle. If you compare it to Fortinet or Palo Alto, Fortinet is low and Palo Alto is very high. Cisco falls in the middle between the two. As far as deployment options go, they often have more wiggle-room with discounts, especially for larger deployments. Therefore, in general, it ranges closer to Fortinet's pricing.

I would guess that the market value of Cisco is going to be towards the higher-end. I don't know that it's the highest, but feature for feature, I'd say it's probably well-priced.

There's an annual subscription. It's not cheap. It's quite pricey if you compare it to other competitors in Pakistan. There aren't any extra costs beyond the yearly licensing. We pay about $200 yearly and we have two firewalls.

I don't really handle the billing, so I'm unsure of the pricing. I work more on the technical side.

We work on a case-by-case basis and are have good offers by Cisco. It's very competitive with other products.

Cisco is considered to be an expensive solution. When comparing to other vendors, it's quite expensive.

The licensing is a bit off because the physical firewall is cheaper than the virtual one. We only have the physical ones as they are cheaper than the virtual ones. We only use the physical firewalls because of the price difference.

It's a brilliant firewall, and the fact that it comes with a perpetual license really does go far in terms of helping the organization in not having to deal with those costs on an annual basis. That is a pain point when it comes to services like the ones we have on FortiGate. That's where we really give Cisco firewalls the thumbs up. From the point of view of total cost of ownership, the perpetual licensing works well in countries like ours, where we are facing challenges with foreign exchange. Trying to set up foreign payments has been a challenge in Zimbabwe, so the fact that we don't have to be subscribed and pay licenses on an annual basis works well. If you look at FortiGate, it's a good product, but we are always under pressure when renewal time comes. Where Cisco falls a bit short is because of the fact that, if I want IPS, I have to buy another license. That's why I have my reservations with it. If I want Cisco AnyConnect, I have to buy another license. That's where we have challenges. That's unlike our next-gen FortiGate where everything comes out-of-the-box.

The pricing is quite fair for what you get. If you're comparing with other products, Cisco is expensive, but you do get benefits for the price.

When it comes to Cisco, the price of everything is higher. Cisco firewalls are expensive, but we get support from Cisco, and that support is very active. When I hit an issue when I was configuring an FTD, as soon as I raised a ticket the guy called me and supported me. Cisco is very proactive. I had the same kind of issue when I was configuring a FortiGate, but those guys took two or three days to call me. I fixed the issue before they even called me.

The value of the pricing needs to be enhanced from Cisco because there are a lot of competitors in the market. There is room for improvement in the pricing when compared to the market. Although, when you compare the benefits of support from Cisco, you can adjust the value and it becomes comparable, because you usually need very good support. So you gain value there with this device.

When it comes to security, pricing should not be an issue, but we know, of course, that it is. Why is an Aston Martin or a Rolls Royce very expensive? It's expensive because the support is there at all times. Replacement parts are available at all times. They offer a lot of opportunities and customer services that others don't come close to offering. Cisco is expensive but it's a highly rated company. It's one of the top-three security companies worldwide.

In terms of costs, other solutions are more expensive than Cisco. Palo Alto is more expensive than Cisco.

It is expensive.

Pricing varies on the model and the features we are using. It could be anywhere from $600 to $1000 to up to $7,000 per year, depending on what model and what feature sets are available to us. The only additional cost is Smart NET. That also depends on whether you're doing gold or silver, 24/7 or 8/5, etc.

We used Check Point and the two are comparable. Cost was really what put us onto the ASAs. They both do what it is we need them to do. At Orvis, what we need to do is very basic. But the price tag for Check Point was exorbitantly more than what it is for the ASA solution. We pay Cisco for maintenance on a yearly basis. There are no additional fees that I'm aware of.

Always look for the history of the products and their evolution, as this will reflect their prices. As for the licenses, be smart and choose the ones you are going to use AS PER YOUR NEED. More features=More Licenses=More work time=Increase in Cost. Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions (i.e. "If it takes you three hours to do an analysis report and the solution you are getting has this feature to reduce your time to five minutes then you can consider this license. But, if there is a feature where you can have access to the machine from the cloud and you are always connected to the company by VPN, there is no need to buy this license").

We are in the process of renewing our three-year license, which costs approximately $24,000 USD for the thirty-six months. In terms of licensing, this product costs a lot, but this cost can save my assets that could be millions for my company. There is no choice.

The pricing for Cisco products is higher than others, but Cisco is a very good, strong, and stable technology. If we compare Huawei or FortiGate or others then the prices are lower, but the higher Cisco price is acceptable because of the stability, trust, and reliability.

The licensing is very expensive.

There are no additional costs to the standard licensing fees.

My company is moving away from the solution because it is quite expensive.

The cost of this solution is high.

With respect to the routers and switches, or the core stacks that we get, they seem to be pretty comparable so I don't have any issues with the licensing. Some of our customers would be more likely to standardize on Cisco equipment if the cost was lower because a lot of people install cheap equipment.

This solution might be expensive, but it is economical in the long run.

The pricing for Cisco ASAv depends on your license. With AnyConnect, it depends on your license. It depends on the number of concurrent users you want to connect. Our license is for one year only, renewable at variable pricing.

We pay an annual fee.

I bought a license for three years and it was really affordable.

Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs. We bought much beefier Palo Altos for a less expensive one-time and annual cost.

Our licensing costs for this solution is on a yearly basis. Just for the firewall, it's about $1.5 million USD.

We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement. The Cisco license was not yearly. It was a yearly license for the firewall. For the router and switch, it was a lifetime license.

The licensing for Cisco ASA is on a yearly basis. We have to renew the Firepower module license. We are in the process of renewing this one. I just made the demand. They have the management who is charge asking about the price and payment terms on different offers.

Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions. Especially in other regions because people are very careful when it comes to spending on IT infrastructure. My suggestion is, first test it, once you see how good it is you will definitely want to renew it.

The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market. I would rate the cost as a six or seven out of ten.

My advice, since I have to pay for licensing each feature that I need to enable, like URL filtering, is to look at a pfSense. That is what we are doing because you have to pay for greater protection, a total solution can be very costly. We are looking at a pfSense, to bring down the total cost. The correct price point, in comparison to other platforms, is the main factor here.