Most Helpful Review
I discovered that I could still keep the data rates really high, up near the 1 gigahertz data speed, without...
Find out what your peers are saying about Meraki MX Firewalls vs. WatchGuard Firebox and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
370,655 professionals have used our research since 2012.
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
The firepower sensors have been great; they do a good job of dropping unwanted traffic.
Unfortunately in Cisco, only the hardware was good.
The most important point is the detection engine which is now part of the next-generation firewalls and which is supported by Cisco Talos.
The most valuable features are the flexibility and level of security that this solution provides.
Integration with all the other Cisco tools is valuable.
We moved from a legacy firewall to the ASA with FirePOWER, increasing our Internet Edge defense dramatically.
Cisco ASA NGFW significantly improves our bank. It protects any high-value products that we use from hackers, viruses, malware, and script-bots. It gives us metrics on network traffic as well as what kind of attacks we are getting from the outside.
Right now, Cisco ASA NGFW has given us a lot of improvement. We are planning to move to a new facility and will be a much larger organization.
I like the automatic firmware updates. We use the Active Directory to authenticate VPN users.
I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well.
Point-to-point VPNs can dynamically follow IP changes with no need for static IPs.
Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active.
The internet traffic shaping has been very valuable.
Deployment takes no more than one working day.
The initial setup for me was straightforward.
A strong, reliable solution for small companies with little or no dedicated IT department.
HostWatch makes it so I can see, in real-time, activity in the event that there is something weird happening on the network. This simplifies my job.
The product's usability is good. It is straightforward and simple. One of the benefits is that it is easy to navigate and intuitive.
The throughput is great. It's perfect. We have no issues whatsoever. The management features are very powerful...
It's pretty simple to use. It's pretty simple to understand, and there's plenty of documentation. It does a pretty good job of what it is meant to do.
One of the most valuable features is the Geolocation. Because we aren't a multinational corporation, it allows me to look at things which might be suspicious to make sure that they are legitimate transactions rather than people sniffing around the network.
One of my favorite features is the Geolocation service, where you can actually block specific activity or IP addresses registered to certain countries. For example, I don't want any web traffic from Russia or North Korea. I may even lock down certain policies down to 'I only want U.S. IP addresses.' I find that very useful.
They've done a lot of work with their SD-WAN, which we do use, to have our old internet service with our new internet service. If anything goes down on a particular interface, I can have different rules applied. Most of my users don't even know when our primary internet goes down anymore... I don't have to be here to do anything to switch it to our backup internet or to switch it back.
If there is any conflict, the reporting feature will kick out all types of information, which is great.
The software was very buggy, to the point it had to be removed.
In NGFW, Cisco should be aligned with the new technology and inspection intelligence because Cisco is far behind in this pipeline.
Most users do not have awareness of this product's functionality and features. Cisco should do something to make them aware of them. That would be quite excellent and useful to organizations that are still using legacy data-center-security products.
There was an error in the configuration, related to our uplink switches, that caused us to contact technical support, and it took a very long time to resolve the issue.
With regards to stability, we had a critical bug come out during our evaluation... not good.
The product would be improved if the GUI could be brought into the 21st Century.
Cisco should improve its user interface design. There is a deep learning curve to the product if you are a newcomer.
There is no support here in Georgia. If something goes wrong, support is not always very helpful with the other firewalls or other products.
Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date.
I need more UTM protection security features.
Meraki tech support staff have a lot more visibility into your network than you do, which is frustrating at times. I understand the approach is to keep the dashboard easier to understand. This will frustrate more advanced users at times.
The IPS, the Intrusion Prevention System, can be improved.
Load balancing options and ability to manage a couple of Internet connections.
Right now, you can postpone the update but eventually, if you don't do the update, it will install the updates automatically for you and that's something that is not working for me.
The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates.
The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection.
Sometimes, the writing rules are a little confusing in how am I doing them.
We were able to take from an older configuration, build a new one quickly, and get it up and running, which didn't take long, but there was some pain around it.
The software base, the management piece that goes onto a server, is not as user-friendly as I would like. There are three different pieces that you have to manage, so it's a little bit convoluted, in my opinion.
Last year, I had an issue with one of the Fireboxes going down. It was overheated, because my server room became overheated and this fried it.
The drawbacks are just sometimes not having the technical information that we need in order to easily make connections with all of our Internet-based clients.
Reporting is something you've got to set up separately. It's one of those things that you've got to put some time into. One of the options is to set up a local report server, which is what I did. It's not great. It's okay... Some of the stuff is a little complicated to get up and running. Once you do, it becomes very user-friendly and easy to work with, but I find there are some implementation headaches with some of their stuff.
The software in it could be a bit more friendly for an amateur user. I look at it and don't understand what half the stuff is. Looking at the interface, it is all mumbo-jumbo to me. It's not a simple interface. You have to be an IT guy to understand it. It is not for your average person to use, then walk away from it. It is much more entailed.
I would like a deeper insight into their bandwidth monitoring.
Pricing and Cost Advice
Always consider what you might need to reduce your wasted time and invest it in other solutions.
Watch out for hidden licensing and incredibly high annual maintenance costs.
We paid about $7,000 for the Cisco firewall, plus another small Cisco router and the lead switch. It was under the combined license. It's a final agreement.
The cost is a big factor for us. This is why we are using it only in our restricted area. They are very much higher than their competitors in the market.
Licensing is expensive compared to other solutions.
Pricing is high, but it is essentially a corporate decision.
The cost is a bit high compared to other solutions in the market.
Cisco recently has become very expensive.
Other content filtering solutions that I have used had more bells and whistles, but given the cost, complexity, and management overhead, I am very pleased with Meraki’s solution.
Meraki is also expensive, but it's a little bit less expensive and it's easier to configure than Cisco ASA.
Pricing varies as per the type of license.
It is more expensive than other solutions, but it is a cloud-managed network solution and support is given at the moment you call. That give a very big plus.
The Meraki UTM is excellent when you buy the Advanced Security license. If you buy a different license you lost all the valuable functions.
It can always improve pricewise regarding throughput.
Their price point worked, which is the reason why we stayed with WatchGuard.
We pay about $3,500 every three years.
I think we might be subscribed to one or two of the premium features.
We had a trade-in offer at the end of our first three-year term. As a result, we pretty much got a free device by buying the three-year subscription. It was around $3,000 for the three-years.
There is an additional cost for support on top of licensing. When I bought my new unit, I received additional time added to my support.
Our licensing costs are around $3000 on a yearly basis. It is just a licensing fee for the services, like the UTM services, and it includes support.
The cost three years ago was about $800.
The two larger devices are about $1,000 each and the smaller ones are about $500 or $600 each... It's cheaper and you have more control because it's self-managed.
Compared 38% of the time.
Compared 11% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Compared 35% of the time.
Compared 16% of the time.
Compared 7% of the time.
Compared 22% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 9% of the time.
Also Known As
|Cisco ASA, Adaptive Security Appliance, ASA||MX64, MX64W, MX84, MX100, MX400, MX600|
Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA) is Cisco's end-to-end software solution and core operating system that powers the Cisco ASA product series. This software solution provides enterprise-level firewall capabilities for all types of ASA products, including blades, standalone appliances and virtual devices. Adaptive Security Appliance provides protection to organizations of all sizes, and allows end-users to access information securely anywhere, at any time, and through any device.
Adaptive Security Appliance is also fully compatible with other key security technologies, and so provides organizations with an all-encompassing security solution.
Block more threats and quickly mitigate those that do breach your defenses with the industry’s first threat-focused NGFW.
|With the proliferation of modern applications and mixed-use networks, host and port based security is no longer sufficient. Cisco Meraki's layer 7 "next generation" firewall, included in MX security appliances and every wireless AP, gives administrators complete control over the users, content, and applications on their network.|
WatchGuard's approach to network security focuses on bringing best-in-class, enterprise-grade security to any organization, regardless of size or technical expertise. Ideal for SMBs and distributed enterprise organizations, our award-winning Unified Threat Management (UTM) appliances are designed from the ground up to focus on ease of deployment, use, and ongoing management, in addition to providing the strongest security possible.
Learn more about Cisco ASA NGFW
Learn more about Meraki MX Firewalls
Learn more about WatchGuard Firebox
|There are more than one million Adaptive Security Appliances deployed globally. Top customers include First American Financial Corp., Genzyme, Frankfurt Airport, Hansgrohe SE, Rio Olympics, The French Laundry, Rackspace, and City of Tomorrow.||Hyatt, ONS||Ellips, Diecutstickers.com, Clarke Energy, NCR, Wrest Park, Homeslice Pizza, Fortessa Tableware Solutions, The Phoenix Residence|
Financial Services Firm17%
Comms Service Provider11%
Software R&D Company27%
Comms Service Provider15%
Comms Service Provider22%
Financial Services Firm11%
Software R&D Company19%
Comms Service Provider15%
Software R&D Company18%
Comms Service Provider13%