I have some past experience with Cisco ASA and PIX.

If I absolutely need to lock down somebody's network in the most secure manner, I'm going to use Palo Alto.

I use Darktrace simultaneously. 

We've been using Cisco for a while. Going from the IPS module on ASA or the IPS appliance, we've transitioned from different Cisco IPS solutions to this Cisco Next Generation IPS. 

It's been Cisco all along, it's just that this one has more visibility and it's next-generation style compared to the older IPS. 

I have used Check Point IPS solutions.

I also have experience with Check Point and I find that the pricing is better with Cisco.

We moved from Sophos to Cisco Firewall because we were looking for better integration between all the appliances and data center. All of our core switches, our wireless system, and other tools are the Cisco brand, meaning that all our monitoring options are integrated under Cisco.

We have used and still use Darktrace. We do not use it to replace Cisco's NGIPS solution but we use it predominantly as an in-network snooper.

We updated from Cisco ASA to NGIPS FTD.

We previously used Check Point and Cyberoam. We switched because the license expired.

I have used many other solutions, such as Palo Alto.

This was originally a Snort product, which was open source. So, there is a community for it worldwide.

We used ISS from IBM in the past, but it was causing many issues and was dropping packets. It was not an ideal solution, so we moved to Sourcefire FirePower NGIPS.

I have experience with Fortinet. I don't remember the name of one of the solutions that I had used in the past.

I'm also aware of Palo Alto, which in many ways is a more solid product. We used it in my previous company as it was more mature and much simpler to use in comparison to Cisco. 

We were using Cisco ASAs. They were going out of service. They were going out of sale and support. So, we decided to move to Firepower. We wanted to go to the Next-Gen IPS type of stuff, and ASAs didn't have that kind of feature set.

I started with Juniper and the Palo Alto UTM Appliances, and many other vendors. But we do have a policy to use multiple vendors.

I have worked with a variety of security solutions. I have worked with products from Trend Micro, Cisco, and others.

Prior to this solution, we used TippingPoint. Although it is a very good solution, there was a problem with the product having too many acquisitions. Every time there was a new acquisition, support was a concern. For example, at one point it was taken over by HP, and then, again, HP disowned it. Support was hampered by this, and if you're not getting support on a critical security appliance then you need to look for other options. This is what led us to adopt Cisco.

We previously used a Russian-based solution that was not popular.

I have experience with a lot of network security products. These include solutions by Cisco, Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Forcepoint.

Prior to this solution, I used the Sophos XG 430.

We didn't previously use a different solution.

I did not work with another solution before this one.

We previously used FortiGate. We switched as we wanted something that had easy management capabilities, so we moved to Cisco. We thought that Cisco would be a bit more mature.

I have worked with similar products from different vendors in the past, although I am avoiding this type of task for the moment.

The main advantages to Cisco are the scale, the integration, the training, and the possibility of finding somebody to work with. Also, the reaction time that they have in case of failure is very fast, and it is easy to replace the setup.

Before implementing Cisco, we used Fortigate and Check Point. 

We used to have ASA 5520. But in time we needed more security features to secure our services and users.

We are using both Cisco and Fortinet.