Anonymous UserExpert - architect of ICT systems at a tech services company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The features we found most valuable are using the IDS and IPS during protection. The application filtering feature is great."
"It's much faster to deploy a power source. If you need to deploy a firewall in the cloud of software, it's much easier and much faster than deploying the office firewall in a rush."
"The initial setup was very straightforward. There was no problem. The initial deployment took about one hour."
"There are a few valuable features that offer very good quality on the solution. Especially NetScreen. We used to use NetScreen for the the product line. It was a very mature solution, very robust, easy to configure, easy to manage, etc. It made it easy to do everything."
"The architecture of the OS in Juniper is very good. It's flexibility, scalability, and the technicality is also good."
"Juniper is more flexible with the commit check and the commit confirmed command. The design of the forwarding and contract plan in the operating system is very important for the performance when we have very big traffic."
"I'm told the solution is the fastest, and, so far, I do find that to be the case."
"It's a very powerful solution and the firewalls offer high performance"
"The SVM deployment has very good performance."
"Using this solution allows us to set up rule-based access control."
"When it comes to their firewall, it notified me about a possible infection."
"The pricing still needs some improvement."
"he stability could be improved."
"They really need to improve the GUI."
"I've talked to people that say Juniper now, as a device, can be a solution for a data center, but in the past, I have not seen this as being possible."
"We have some weird errors and some weird behavior on the solution occasionally. The device gets buggy without anyone touching it. It would work and then suddenly stop. Sometimes you need to just move the cards out and restart it again, and it will work. The solution itself, the hardware and the software, there must be some bugs that need to be dealt with."
"In the next release, I would like to see improvements made to the GUI because it isn't very good."
"We worked with Cisco's support and Juniper's support and there are some differences, to be honest, Cisco is more available and is more competent at addressing our cases."
"It could use more tutorials."
"The solution would be improved if all of the advanced features were included in the SVM."
"We are unable to reliably specify bandwidth limits for particular clients, which is something that needs to be improved."
"I would like to see some new features for improving the security part of the solution."
"After some research, I think that the cost of Juniper is more than Check Point, Palo Alto, and Fortinet."
"As a customer, the pricing is good for us."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"For virtualization security, the cost is approximately $50 USD per seat."
Earn 20 points
Juniper vSRX is ranked 2nd in Virtualization Security with 12 reviews while Sophos Virtualization Security is ranked 4th in Virtualization Security with 3 reviews. Juniper vSRX is rated 8.0, while Sophos Virtualization Security is rated 7.0. The top reviewer of Juniper vSRX writes "Fast with good usability and fairly scalable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Sophos Virtualization Security writes "Good performance, scalable, and multi-platform". Juniper vSRX is most compared with Juniper SRX, pfSense, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall and Azure Firewall, whereas Sophos Virtualization Security is most compared with Trend Micro Deep Security. See our Juniper vSRX vs. Sophos Virtualization Security report.
See our list of best Virtualization Security vendors.
We monitor all Virtualization Security 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.