We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"Its ease of configuration and management is very useful for us and for other companies that don't have an onsite IT person. It is easy to configure and easy to manage. It is easy to configure the VPN with the Auto VPN feature."
"It has very good features; it's easy to use, configure, set up, and deploy."
"They have very good technical support and I have relied heavily on them."
"In general, Meraki MX is easy to work with."
"Meraki MX offers advanced filtration options, plus it behaves like a router and a firewall at the same time."
"Dual WAN connections are greatly simplified and point-to-point VPNs automatically connect regardless of what WAN connection is active."
"Both the scalability and the scalability are great with Meraki MX."
"It has the most advanced security features, for example, layer 3 and layer 7 firewall capabilities and the end team and IPS protection. It also has IPS, and it has very good functioning of cloning services. You don't actually have to touch the device. If you have multiple companies in different countries, you don't really require this device to be touched. You can get it delivered directly to any office of a country, and then you can simply put your configuration over the cloud. It's very simplified and easy to manage. It gives a very good granular visibility about your network. Earlier, a lot of things were lacking in the network. We were unable to identify where the problem was, but after implementing Meraki MX, we are able to dig down and identify where is the problem. We can easily and quickly identify the sources and the root causes of the issues."
"The best thing about the product is the very good threat prevention output."
"Technical support is good."
"The most valuable features are unified threat management which provides security intelligence and the VPN for both site-to-site and remote access."
"Ease of management and the VPN integration."
"Offers the right amount of control without being incredibly convoluted and frustrating."
"It's a very cost-effective solution."
"We are able to block whatever we want to block by using this product. It provides all required security features, such as content filtering, VPN, in one box. Before switching to SonicWall, we had specified all required features."
"Good site categorization and application controls."
"They need to improve the link between Meraki and Active Directory."
"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."
"As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do."
"The security is not as strong as it could be"
"It would be nice if the different services, including the SIEM SOC and endpoint detection and response (EDR) were integrated into one, so that I don't have to go to different vendors for different services."
"We have been having a problem with the VPN. When the energy goes down and is back again, the VPN link doesn't get established. We have to manually turn off the modems and other pieces of equipment and manually establish the VPN. It has been around one month since we have been having this problem, and we don't have enough support from Meraki to solve the problem."
"The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better."
"Management can be improved in Meraki MX."
"We have been facing issues with reporting."
"GUI interface could be improved."
"The log sections could be done more clearly."
"Its reporting can be improved. Currently, we cannot directly get the user names. It only shows the IP, which makes it a bit confusing because we need to use the IP to find the user. If we could directly get the name of the user, it would be better."
"The marketing of SonicWall has to be increased. Currently, when it comes to firewalls, most people go for Cisco and Palo Alto. SonicWall should improve its marketing and branding policies to increase sales. Other than that, it is good."
"There is a point I don't like about SonicWall in the past and now. Most of the destinations we look at when we're detecting some user using too much bandwidth or something like that, SonicWall just gave us destination IP address, instead of the full qualified domain name. I think that's the most important part that is still missing. I think that's the most important for us."
"The monitoring is a little bit confusing."
"In terms of what needs to be improved, I would say better load balancing and data filtering."
"The price could be lower, but compared to the TCO of other products, it's not really that expensive."
"The pricing could always be improved — especially with the shape the economy is in at the moment."
"The license cost depends on the box. We acquired a different product line. We are dealing with MX appliance now, that is, MX6, MX54, MX100, MX250, MX450. Every box has got an identity, and it has got its own specification. Every box has got a different license fee. We deployed Meraki MX in UAE when it was not a mature product. We took a risk, but we were successful. We saved a huge amount of money after implementing and removing all the MPLS and leased lines. We got a broadband connection because Meraki MX could work on a broadband connection. We have drastically saved a very good amount of money, which was one of the successful things apart from the successful solution."
"The price varies depending on the hardware platform as well as the type of license and whether you're adding security or not."
"Like any Cisco product, the license is really expensive for small business clients. It needs to be cheaper. If you look it up, you might go, "That doesn't make any sense.""
"Its licensing cost could be better."
"It is a good global solution in terms of the price and features, but because we sell this solution in dollars, sometimes we don't get to sell this solution in Brazil because the dollar is very expensive. The price of every project is different. It varies depending upon the project, scenario, and client."
"Meraki is the best option — based on the price and the features available."
"The price is high compared to some other solutions."
"Customers are required to pay for a yearly subscription."
"You need to purchase multiple licenses to manage multiple devices which is cost-prohibitive for the value you would receive."
"The license that we purchased is good for three years."
"The price is fair."
"Its price is very high, which makes it difficult to convince the clients to buy this solution."
"The price could be better for us in Bolivia."
"It has a yearly subscription."
Meraki MX is ranked 1st in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 17 reviews while SonicWall TZ is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 30 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.4, while SonicWall TZ is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Makes it easy to stay on top of everything for security". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall TZ writes "Easy to implement, fairly stable, and supports SSL-DPI". Meraki MX is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Cisco Firepower NGFW Firewall, Sophos XG and pfSense, whereas SonicWall TZ is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Cisco ASA Firewall, Sophos XG, pfSense and SonicWall NSa. See our Meraki MX vs. SonicWall TZ report.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) 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.