I have used Check Point and FortiGate.

I have worked with Sophos and SonicWall. As far as the real packet forwarding internet mix is concerned, Juniper is far better than SonicWall, FortiGate, Sophos, and Cisco.

We have previously used other solutions, such as Cisco.

I am not sure of the exact reason we switched as I was not involved in the decision-making process at that time. However, I know that the IT backbone network was transitioning from a Cisco or legacy network to an MPLS network. The Juniper SRX solution was already in the deployment phase when I joined, with phases one to four already completed and it was in phase seven. The last phase, security, was yet to be deployed in the network. It was likely pre-decided before I joined and it could have been due to the MPLS deployment and migration from legacy. It is possible that they had won an RFP and based on that they were part of the network. The choice to change could have been based on functionalities or other factors, but it was a competition between different vendors to deploy the IP backbone.

We have used other solutions. We decided to change to Juniper for something a little different. We have used some open-source firewalls in the past, and we wanted something a little more robust and fully supported in a real business class environment.

I sell other products from vendors such as F5, and they have a good training facility online. Juniper is behind in terms of video training that they have available.

I also use Palo Alto and Fortinet. Juniper has better firewall-level network functionality.

I use Fortinet and Cisco solutions.

I've used Cisco and Fortigate solutions, among others, in the past as well. I find Juniper easier to use from a GUI aspect. Cisco is better from a CLI perspective.

Prior to the Juniper SRX devices, we had some Cisco ASAs. They were reaching end-of-life so we had to replace them.

At the time we were shopping, Cisco was behind in their technologies. Had they kept up with the technology and provided a comparable device at a competitive price, we would have stayed with Cisco.

We are using Verax and also FortiGate products. We use them simultaneously.

Currently, I am also using a Cisco product. The split between Cisco and Juniper devices is approximately 50/50.

Compared to Cisco, the price for Juniper SRX routers is very reasonable. The reason that we are switching to Juniper is because of the cost.

We previously used Cisco ASA. The results were not good.

Previously, we worked with several solutions. We switched to Juniper SRX because of the pricing, scalability, and performance.

We also have a small number of Cisco routers but we rely primarily on Juniper. The Cisco products are more expensive.

We were using a different solution, a Microsoft solution. We were looking for a more affordable solution which would suit our needs.

It's easier to deploy FortiGate, so maybe we will replace some of our Juniper firewalls with FortiGate in the future. We would still use Juniper for routers and switches but use FortiGate for firewalls. 

It's easier to manage EDA TPS on FortiGate, so maybe we will replace Juniper if they can't provide us with a good solution for this in the future. Maybe in a few months, we will replace some Juniper appliances with FortiGate in some projects.

We use a variety of solutions, including Cisco and Check Point.

We migrated to this solution from a Cisco ASA (Adaptive Security Appliance).

We use FortiGate solutions and we have been deploying them more than Juniper SRX because of the benefits.

We used Cisco and CheckPoint. Routing functionality and advanced security services were limited.

At one point we tried to move the mobile data firewall from our Juniper SRX56 to the Cisco ASA 5585. What we found out is that Cisco was not performing well at all. I was very disappointed by the Cisco solution. There were more issues for the same amount of traffic. With Juniper, you just have to upgrade to handle additional clients, but when we tried with Cisco, definitely the result was not good at all.

Previously, we had a Cisco ASA 5510. It was old and needed to be replaced. We switched because the Cisco ASA is underpowered. If you try to do too many functions, like IDS/IPS, UTM, virus scanning, and Smart Net, support is expensive.

I previously used a Netscreen ISG1000 firewall. I switched because the ISG was end-of-life and Netscreen was bought by Juniper.

I've used Cyber and a Sophos UTM device. Juniper is, generally, more advanced. I haven't been able to get enough training to maintain the Juniper device.

The main reason we chose Juniper was the stability, and the number of concrete connections that users can make when, let's say, they going out to the internet, and accessing services over the internet. Also, regarding the network port-forwarding to internal servers, in services, the device that we had before was Cyberoam UTM, and it didn't quite handle the high load. I generally noticed that SRX can handle pretty high network loads when going in or out. It's proven itself to be stable in that regard.

I used Cisco, and Palo Alto, and used McAfee. As a consultant, a systems integrator, if customers go to SRX it's because of its features and the stability of the product. It's the most stable product.

We had different routers for each of the incoming lines to the office, and we had other firewalls on the backend to manage them. We switched because it was too difficult to manage multiple solutions for each of those lines. We wanted to have one single place where we could manage everything. We also didn't want to have some people going out from one internet line and some from another internet line. We wanted to combine all those lines together and make them work as one, and that's what we achieved with SRX.

We have also had firewalls from Palo Alto as well as FortiGate. I prefer Palo Alto, comparatively, it is better.

We find that the technical support with FortiGate is very slow. We are not able to get the proper help in spite of having the AMC add-on.

I have experience with Fortinet and Sophos and I found that the installation and configuration were easier with these solutions.

We're also using Check Point at the moment.

We did previously use a solution called NetScreen.

As resellers, we deal with a variety of products including Cisco and Fortinet.

We did use a different solution. The old boxes were at end of life.

As we are a service provider, we offer various other products to our customer:

• Astaro ASG
• Avaya/Netscreen
• Fortinet
• HP Switches & WiFi
• Juniper SSG
• Juniper SRX 210 & 240
• Juniper WXC
• Sophos next generation SG, including RED, SG, and WiFi
• Telindus Crocus E1

Previously we used a CISCO ASA solution. But in the last three years, we switched to the Juniper solution because Juniper has a competitive price per feature.

We used Fortinet, and changed to Juniper to use Junos.

Previously, we were using the old Juniper ScreenOS, we switched due to end-of-support. I have also expertise with Cisco ASA, Cisco Firepower, Checkpoint R80.10, Dell Sonicwall, Fortinet.

I'm also familiar with Cisco and Fortigate.

We previously didn't use a different solution.

We looked at MikroTik. However, more features such as the performance, scalability, and consolidation were available on the Juniper device.

We've also used Cyberoam, which is now Sophos. 

We had Cisco, but when comparing the price, Juniper SRX was cheaper.

We have not used another product previously.

This is the first solution that we implemented.

Juniper SSG, switched because of capacity and change of focus from Juniper.

We also use Fortinet FortiGate and I have some experience and knowledge of Cisco ASA.

I think there was a problem before I came to the company with Cisco and their firewall, so they decided to switch to Juniper.

We migrated from Juniper Screen OS to Junos. We are leaving Juniper now as their focus on security seems to have dropped.

No, we didn't.

Our customer decided to switch from Cisco to Juniper for their security deployment.