Our previous solution was WatchGuard. WatchGuard is very easy to manage. It's a very user-friendly product. It's just a little bit pricey for what we are using, for the small deployments. Not everything has 100 people, or 1000 people behind it. Some of them only have five or 10, and you don't want to be spending $4,000 for a few people.

We had some older products. Because we're remote, we don't always have the highest speed connections. At one location in particular, we had five DSL lines bonded into one to make a bigger pipe and finally got fiber out to that location in an industrial park. We were going from approximately 50 down and 13 up to 300/300. We knew the throughput for the older device wouldn't handle it. To use what you pay for, you have to upgrade.

When selecting a vendor cost is definitely a factor, but it's not the factor. It would mostly be ease of use and reliability, meaning the device is going to be there, the company is going to be there, the support is going to be there. You need all that background stuff. The price is important, but if it makes everything run well, and makes my management time minimal, then it's worth spending a little more money on the device. If it doesn't do the job, there's no use buying it.

No.

No, this was the first solution that we tried

Before using Fortinet, we used Sophos. We weren't happy with Sophos. It just didn't perform well when it came to preventing attacks. It didn't work well for us, so we switched. We find Fortinet much stronger when it comes to preventing proxy traffic.

We did not have a previous solution. There are no other DAM solutions available like FDB.