We performed a comparison between Cisco IOS Security and Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"There is a positive impact on security, particularly the intrusion feature, which helps keep the solution concealed and secure."
"The Intrusion Firewall is a valuable feature."
"The hardware is pretty stable. It's also a very good product performance-wise. Initially, it wasn't mature like a firewall and there were other leaders, but now they have included almost all the features of next-generation security. Basically, it's a good product to work with."
"The solution effectively integrates with Umbrella."
"Cisco has always been a premium product. There's a lot of other entry-level solutions. This is more robust."
"Cisco is head-and-shoulders above all of the competition when it comes to technical support."
"Cisco IOS Security is a mature product with extensive capabilities, serving as the base for the defense layer. It offers good network visibility, which helps in rapid response through the Rapid Threat Containment feature. Its deployment and configuration are straightforward."
"The solution is very user-friendly and easy to deal with."
"For those who want a next-gen firewall that's easy to configure and easy to operate, I think you should go for Palo Alto."
"The user interface is a bit more professional than some free products."
"The most valuable features are the simplicity, transparency, and overall ease of management."
"We are currently using the URL filtering feature, which is the most popular."
"The initial setup was straightforward. It's quite easy. Deployment took one to two weeks."
"It's very easy to use and configure. What is nice about Palo Alto is that even if you don't understand how to use it, you can just click on upload and upload everything that needs to be blocked."
"I like the solution's interface."
"It is a stable product."
"I think setup could be one area for improvement, because sometimes we don't have people inside so we have to move to the place."
"The user interface needs to be improved."
"The initial setup is complicated."
"We have a very bad experience on the support. They take too much time requesting logs, and they are not coming directly online to resolve the issues."
"Cisco is an expensive firewall, so the pricing can be improved."
"It would be ideal if the solution had more capacity."
"The company needs to make its solution more affordable to make it more accessible to larger markets. Otherwise, it's seen as an enterprise-level solution that small or medium-sized organizations can't afford and therefore they won't even look at it."
"I wish it would be more like the next generation firewall technology. There should be more selection between the application and filtering."
"The solution needs to improve its local technical support services. There is no premium support offered in our market."
"The initial setup is complex."
"The cost involves the price of the hardware, which is expensive. However, most of the Palo Alto solutions are expensive."
"Palo Alto Networks Threat Prevention could improve the commercial offing. Other solutions, such as Fortinet provide better commercial features."
"The price of licenses should be lowered to make it less costly to scale our solution."
"I think they can use some improvement on FID."
"Generally, to deploy it will take some downtime, about a day."
"The application’s pricing and dashboard need improvement. It could be user-friendly."
More Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco IOS Security is ranked 11th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 47 reviews while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is ranked 6th in Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) with 24 reviews. Cisco IOS Security is rated 8.0, while Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Cisco IOS Security writes "User-friendly and excels in documentation, making it easier to resolve issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention writes "A good amount of granularity and advanced URL filtering capabilities". Cisco IOS Security is most compared with Cisco Secure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki MX, Fortinet FortiOS and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention is most compared with Check Point IPS, Fortinet FortiGate IPS, Arista NDR, Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Trend Micro TippingPoint Threat Protection System. See our Cisco IOS Security vs. Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention report.
See our list of best Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) vendors.
We monitor all Intrusion Detection and Prevention Software (IDPS) 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.
