We performed a comparison between Palo Alto Networks K2-Series and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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."I am "headache free" that I don't have to categorize all the websites and that security has been pre categorized by the people, and that the services are getting updated. At least one part of my problem is over."
"Easy to use support and licensing portal as well as activation process."
"Fortinet FortiGate is scalable for our users. Right now, we have almost 70 users. We do not have any plan to increase our usage of FortiGate. For maintaining the firewall solution, one staff member is enough."
"The IPsec tunnels are very easily created, and quite interoperable with devices from other vendors."
"The web tutor and automatic rules by schedule are good features."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"The most important feature, normally for small business customers, is link load balancing."
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"The company is inventive and always adds a lot of great features."
"We've found the solution offers us good stability."
"It's easy to configure."
"This is a very reliable firewall and we have never had problems with it."
"I have found that Palo Alto Networks K2-Series has the best security. They are more user-friendly, older firewalls used to have to be configured using the command-line interface, but in this solution, it can be done in the GUI."
"Palo Alto has an approach that makes the configuration easier not only for the customers but also for the IT help for the customers."
"Palo Alto's App-ID is what differentiates it from other competitors."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is its management abilities. Additionally, the updates are very good."
"With App-ID, we can identify exact traffic. Even if someone tries to fool the firewall with a different port number, or with the correct port number, Palo Alto is able to identify what kind of traffic it is."
"One of the key features for us is product stability. We are a bank, so we require 24/7 service."
"Compared to other firewalls from Check Point, Fortinet, and Cisco, for example, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls use the most advanced techniques. They have sandbox integration and others in the orchestrator. Palo Alto's security features are at a higher level than those of the competitors at the moment."
"The structure is much faster and more sophisticated than Cisco."
"I like the remote access and URL filtering features that are available on global products."
"The DNS sync code in your filtering is the most valuable feature of the Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls."
"The first time I came across these firewalls, what surprised me the most was their web user interface. It is complete and gives you a lot of information. You can do 80% of the things related to your network and firewall through the web UI. In some of the other devices, the UI is not as complete. App-ID is also very valuable in customer networks. When you're seeing a lot of traffic in your network, you can see in your web UI which users have the applications that are consuming the most bandwidth. You have a broad context, which is very good."
"I love the Policy Optimizer feature. I am also completely happy with its stability."
"There were quite a few problems with the stability of the system."
"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."
"It could use more templates for third-party site-to-site VPN setups other than FortiGate and Cisco."
"The UI could be improved."
"Stability and technical support are the two major issues I have found with Fortinet."
"Technical support for this solution can be improved."
"At first glance, the interface for the device is very confusing."
"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."
"The tool needs to improve integration with more products from other vendors. I would like the product to add threat intelligence features as well."
"When it comes to renewing the solution, they tend to try to jack up the pricing."
"They could improve by providing more features in the solution."
"It is recommended that the Palo Alto Networks K2-Series be implemented step by step for the Panorama. Sometimes we can't overwrite the configurations because it fails."
"Higher levels of support are excellent but new users may need additional options."
"I'd like to see more data protection on the system."
"The password function of the solution could be improved. Additionally, some of the processes take too long to complete."
"The ease of management and configuration should be improved."
"Sometimes some of the applications the customer has do not respond as they normally should."
"The support could be improved. Palo Alto does not have a support team located in Bangladesh, and their support team operates from another location. Therefore, when we raise a ticket, it takes some time for them to respond, which can be problematic for us."
"Everything has been great. More machine learning would be something great to see, but I don't know if it's a priority for Palo Alto."
"When we looked at it originally, we needed to host the Panorama environment ourselves. I would prefer it if we could take this as a service. It might be that it is available, but for some reason we didn't choose it. The downsides of hosting are that we need to feed and water the machines. We are trying to move to a more SaaS environment where we have less things in our data centers, whether they be in our cloud data centers or physical data centers, which can reduce our physical data center footprint."
"Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls work slowly for vulnerability management. Its performance could be faster."
"The solution has normal authentication, but does not have two-factor or multi-factor authentication. There is room for development there."
"The tech support was once great, but now it is poor. The tech support has gone south. It is really difficult. I had a Priority 1 case last a week in their queue, and after multiple complaints, I finally got somebody to take the case. These are things that are unacceptable in the business world. They could train their employees better."
"The initial configuration is complicated to set up."
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is ranked 28th in Firewalls with 29 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 163 reviews. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is rated 8.4, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series writes "Easy to implement and manage, and the documentation is good". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls writes "We get reports back from WildFire on a minute-by-minute basis". Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is most compared with , whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense. See our Palo Alto Networks K2-Series vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls 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.
In the best tradition of these questions, Feature-wise both are quite similar, but each has things it's better at, it kind of depends what you value most.
PA is good at app control, web filtering and such like, they have always been top of the pile there. The GUI is very good, and their product is very user-focused.
Fortinet is good for scalability and predictable high throughput (ASICs in the hardware), and useful things like authentication flexibility, CLI config (if you have any networking/Cisco people, they always seem to prefer CLI over GUI) and have better OT features, maybe relevant to your manufacturing use?
Fortinet seem to have a broader integration offering with their security fabric than PA do, plus they can do Fortinet-based wifi, switching, etc. Depends if you are prepared to go all-in with a single vendor.
Hi,
Both FT and PA have compelling features for large Enterprises. I would like to add a few good points about Fortinetwhich might be helpful ( from my 13 years of engagement with them as Distributor and Partner)
Fortinet:
Have higher throughput; which comes with competitive rates
Wide range of models to select to meet your requirement, without spending heavliy
Outstanding customer support and very active customer care team
Easly available skilled resources from the channel for deployment and post-implementation support
Regards
Abhilash
Hello. The question is what you are going to have as a result of application