We performed a comparison between Juniper SRX Series Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Features: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is highly regarded for its simplicity, intuitive interface, and exceptional customer assistance. It provides advantageous capabilities, including site-to-site VPN, effortless configuration, and a robust command line. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in embedded machine learning, formidable security functionalities, and a cohesive platform. They present features such as application identification, DNS security, URL filtering, and GlobalProtect VPN.
Juniper SRX Series Firewall could enhance its capacity, reporting and alerts, user interface, device reliability, documentation, and feature set. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls would benefit from improved customization, configuration simplicity, machine learning capabilities, troubleshooting tools, documentation, user interface, VPN availability, and product stability.
Service and Support: Customers have generally found the customer service of Juniper SRX Series Firewall to be satisfactory, with helpful and knowledgeable support. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls have received mixed feedback, as some customers have praised the support while others have expressed dissatisfaction.
Ease of Deployment: The setup process for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is time-consuming, varying based on the environment's complexity. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are known for their simplicity and ease of use. Palo Alto is considered more user-friendly and has a quicker deployment time.
Pricing: The setup cost for Juniper SRX Series Firewall is seen as simple, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls are considered to be more expensive than other vendors. Juniper's pricing is fair and within budget, while Palo Alto's pricing is justified considering the level of security and features offered.
ROI: Juniper SRX Series Firewall is praised for its reliability, consistent performance, and advanced security capabilities, which ultimately lead to a favorable return on investment. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls excel in providing better visibility, detailed reporting, and streamlined management, resulting in decreased administrative burden.
Comparison Results: Based on the comparison between Juniper SRX Firewall and Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, it is evident that users prefer Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. This is due to its embedded machine learning for real-time attack prevention, strong security capabilities, and a unified platform that offers ease of use and maintenance. Users appreciate the advanced security features and user-friendly interface.
"It has improved our security capabilities."
"The most valuable features are the policies, filtering, and configuration."
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"I like Fortinet FortiGate's antispam filter, SPN, and clustering features."
"One of the nice things about FortiGate is that it can be deployed on the cloud or on-premises. You can actually do both. That's the biggest reason why I stick with this solution as opposed to something like Cisco Meraki. Another nice thing is that I can log directly into a FortiGate or get to it through their FortiCloud access products. They're pretty reliable and consistent. One of the reasons why I started using the product was their single pane of management. I can deploy their line of firewalls in conjunction with their switching and access points, and I can manage the entire network from one interface. I don't have to log into one interface for the firewall, another one for the access points, and another one for the switches. These firewalls have access point controller functionality built right into the system, so I don't even have to purchase additional devices to manage them."
"The stability of the solution is excellent, as it is with other Fortinet products."
"The solution can scale well."
"We purchased Fortinet because of the pricing, its functionality, because it met our requirements, and the total cost of ownership over five years was quite reasonable. In the market, Fortinet is rated quite well."
"It'sa very secure device, it has good attack prevention capabilities using UTM."
"The solution is relatively easy and inexpensive to maintain."
"The main features are safeguarding their data and ensuring robust security services for organizational data."
"The most valuable feature is robustness."
"It is a part of the infrastructure when we're selling Juniper. That's what clients are familiar with and that's what they rely on."
"The IPSec configuration is going well."
"You can scale the solution."
"The most valuable feature is the virtualization because it can be used for customers who are using the mobile data network to request a private connection to a remote site."
"The App-ID, Content-ID, User-ID, and encryption and decryption are valuable features."
"The scalability is very good."
"The interface is very nice. We generally like the UI the product offers."
"I like to install Palo Alto mainly on the data center side to have visibility into all VLANs. That gives full visibility into the core."
"The solution is very stable."
"Application control, IPS, and sandboxing towards the cloud are the most valuable features. It is a very user-friendly product with a very easy-to-use interface."
"It's a next-generation firewall and it's pretty stable. You don't have to worry about if you restart it for some maintenance. It will just come back."
"The feature that I like the most is its IPS model, the WildFire model. I really like how the whole threat protection model functions, including the vulnerability and anti-spyware aspects. That is really awesome."
"The logs need to be better. They need to be more visible and easier to access."
"Its reporting can be improved. Sometimes, I don't get proper reports."
"They need to improve their technical support."
"Due to its higher cost, Fortinet FortiGate can lead to increased operational expenses."
"They should make the rule sets more understandable for the end user. When you're trying to explain to somebody how a computer network is secured, sometimes it's difficult for an end user or customer to understand. If there was a way to make the terminology more accessible to the end user, the set up could be easier. They should translate the technical jargon to an easily relatable and understandable conversation for the end user, the customer, that would be brilliant. Particularly in an environment where the IT structure is audited regularly, there's always pressure from the auditor to up the standards and up the security and you get your USCERT's that come out and there's a warning about this and the customer will want to lock out so much and when you apply it they run into issue where they can't search the internet or print to their remote office. Of course they can't print to your remote office, they just locked it up. They should make the language more understandable for the customer. If there's a product out there that made the jargon understandable to John Q. Public, I would buy that."
"Monitoring and reporting could be better."
"I would like to see improvements in the support from Fortinet. Here in the Philippines, whenever we have problems with a Fortinet product, we mostly ask for support from distributors and resellers and not directly from Fortinet."
"The initial setup is complex."
"I think Juniper SRX should have a GUI. Some of the competitors are already implementing GUI for the firewall."
"Juniper SRX is stable, but it could improve. FortiGate has better stability than Juniper SRX."
"To compare with Fortinet, Juniper needs to improve their security features."
"The visibility/reporting could be better. To see something, you have to export the log to a syslog and then process with another product."
"The configuration is difficult and it should be easier."
"In comparison to other enterprise-level firewalls, such as Cisco FTD, Cisco has improved significantly. In the past, I believed that Juniper SRX was superior, but after seeing the advancements in the FTD platform, Cisco has better functionality. I have not recently explored Juniper SRX's next-generation firewall capabilities as we only use basic firewall filtering in our enterprise network."
"I would like them to add a dashboard because it's difficult to operate."
"JTAC (Juniper Networks Technical Assistance Center) is just okay for technical assistance. However, if you are used to Cisco TAC responsiveness, you will need to adjust your expectations with Juniper Networks TAC."
"There is a bit of limitation with its next-generation capabilities. They could be better. In terms of logs, I feel like I am a bit limited as an administrator. While I see a lot of logs, and that is good, it could be better."
"They could improve their support and pricing and maybe integration. It's a little more expensive that Check Point but the quality is better. Integration with firewall endpoints could be better. Palo Alto does have very good malware or antivirus protection. I think they could improve on that front."
"I'm thinking about a new feature. They have decryption. It's a good idea to use decryption on Palo Alto. It would be good if they had offloading of the traffic, and if they could decrypt the traffic and offload it. Like, for example, ASM on our site. We have an SSL decryption to offload the traffic. We could use that on Palo Alto."
"In the cloud, the HA could be a lot better. Its price could also be better. It is very expensive."
"I would like to see it provide us with intelligent information from the data that it captures, within the same cost."
"From a documentation standpoint, there is room for improvement. Even Palo Alto says that their documentation is terrible."
"The level of control and granularity in terms of rule customization could be enhanced. However, compared to our previous solution, Palo Alto provides much better drill-down capabilities."
"When it comes to their support, we have to select every single component that we want to include in a particular bundle. That is a very tedious process. T"
More Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls Pricing and Cost Advice →
Juniper SRX Series Firewall is ranked 18th in Firewalls with 86 reviews while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is ranked 6th in Firewalls with 162 reviews. Juniper SRX Series Firewall is rated 7.8, while Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Juniper SRX Series Firewall writes "Highly scalable, user-friendly UI, and easy to maintain". 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". Juniper SRX Series Firewall is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks WildFire, Netgate pfSense, Check Point NGFW and Meraki MX, whereas Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls is most compared with Check Point NGFW, Azure Firewall, Meraki MX, Sophos XG and Sophos XGS. See our Juniper SRX Series Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors and 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.