I haven’t faced any issues with the solution’s scalability. Our clients for the solution are large corporate or global customers.

Obviously, it is scalable as long as you have the licenses and support with Palo Alto. You can implement the firewalls in high-availability mode or use the cloud functionality as well. For scalability, Palo Alto is optimized.

We have 30-plus sites around the world with more than 4,000 users.

It is a scalable solution. We have more than 20 entities using this solution. 

Compared to Checkpoint Maestro Firewall, the solution's scalability is not up to the mark. We'll need to upgrade the firewall for any tech refresh, throughput requirement, or hardware-based incremental. We have more than 100 customers for Palo Alto Networks VM-Series.

As for scalability, it can be scalable if deployed correctly from the start. Regarding usage, the number of users will likely remain consistent, but the deployment of various firewall types may increase. This could include different instances or flavors beyond the Palo Alto VM series, such as cloud-native versions on Azure or from other vendors. 

The scalability is fantastic. We're using the lowest-end product right now, and I don't foresee when we'll have to upgrade. We've got a long way where we can continue to scale up.

We currently have multiple people that use it for VPN purposes, to access our servers behind the firewall. It is not used nearly as extensively as it should be. However, next year, we're going to start flowing all of our internet traffic through it.

We're all working remotely, and we're going to be connecting through the firewall. This means that our traffic is going to greatly increase, meaning that our usage will also increase. We'll also be using many more of the features.

My company has 1,000 users of the product, but not all of them are connected to the product all the time since my company has three different fire products running in the cloud. I would say there are around 600 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series users.

I rate the tool’s scalability an eight or nine out of ten.

Scalability might be an issue for large organizations. The throughput is a challenge. Multiple segregations need to be done. More than 40 customers are using the solution. We don't face challenges in deployment and maintenance.

The product has good scalability. We have small to enterprise businesses as our clients for it.

I rate the product's stability a seven out of ten. It could be better. We have four users for it at the moment. We plan to increase the number of devices.

We haven't explored the scalability yet.

We have approximately 80 Windows 10 clients, and we have approximately 85 users in our organization.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for scalability.

We have 5000 Palo Alto Networks VM-Series users as our clients. I rate its scalability a ten out of ten.

We currently don't have many end-users of this solution. It is being used mostly for servers. We have around 100 servers. In the future, we plan to have more users. Our company has around 10,000 people.

Almost 25 customers in Riyadh migrated from Juniper to Palo Alto this year. Before buying the product, we must know the number of users who will be using it. We must buy the model that best suits our needs.

I rate the solution's scalability a nine out of ten. We have 100 users for the product. 

I give VM-Series six out of 10 for the scalability. It's one area where they need to improve. Scaling up requires a lot of effort because it's cloud infrastructure. You need to change a lot of settings and ask them to customize before it starts working. 

There are still some issues after a customer has customized the solution. Scalability is something they are working on. I am hoping that we'll see some decent scalability within a year and a half. 

I don't think that scaling will be a problem since we can adjust the VM-Series model that we want.

I have around 100 instances protected behind this device.

It is an easy-to-scale product and suitable for enterprises.

We have almost 3,000 branch offices set up across the globe.

Our intention is to increase usage of Palo Alto, adopting it for security in all of our future products.

You already can scale it if you put it in Auto Scaling groups. If you put it in a load balancer, it should already be able to scale. 

We put our Palo Altos in the public VPC, then we have contractors come over the Internet and VPN into the Palo Altos to get into the AWS environment. 

This solution is quite scalable because it has options for deploying in a VM as well as an appliance. The interfaces are all license-based, which means that features can be added just by obtaining another license.

Our current environment has more than three gigs of traffic.

We have a team of four or five people that is responsible for the network. They are continually monitoring the firewall and updating the policies, as required.

We're still learning about the scalability. We have run into some issues with scaling and limitations associated with some of the configurations. However, it is a solution that we have been happy with overall.

Palo Alto does a good job on the scalability. In my opinion, it has excellent scalability.  

The limit of the product is based on resources that we can obtain from AWS. We have approximately 3500 users and 200 servers leveraging the Palo Alto product.

One of the great features that we liked and selected it was its  scalability. We can autoscale and put it in Auto Scaling groups, which is very useful.

The Series 2000 version of Palo Alto were somewhat big for small or medium customers. They did not have a middle box. 

In the newer version (3850s), all of them are scalable. They fit better into medium or small businesses, so it is easy for us. E.g, if we have a VMware 500 appliance, we can upgrade it to a 100. They have improved in this way.

It has to be more scalable for the deployment of VMs on the cloud.

It is definitely scalable. We have about 100 users with about 200 to 300 instances on the cloud that we protect.

It is a scalable tool. Considering the licensing part of the solution, it may not seem scalable, especially when you want to move from Palo Alto Networks VM-300 to Palo Alto Networks VM-500 since, for such a procedure, the virtual machines will have to be brought down and registered again with a different license, which is challenging.

My company's customers who use the solution are mostly enterprise-sized businesses.

We are happy with the scalability. 

We just started migrating to the cloud. Thus, we are slowly adding more volume to it. Maybe next year, we should know how it is scaling in the cloud.

It is scalable but I cannot really comment on how much because we have not taken it to that level. We have between 450 and 500 users.

It is very easy to scale. All you have to do is get access to the VM base and then spin it off into another virtual environment or send it into the cloud.  This means that you now have a data center through Palo Alto.

They have a new product called Prisma that allows you to create links between remote users working from different areas and use that to connect to the clouds in this infrastructure. It also allows you to get connectivity to that but not using a backhaul. Rather, you connect straight from wherever you are.

In the places where we have deployed this solution, they have a couple of thousand users.

This is a scalable solution but it would be better if it had direct integration with Microsoft Azure.

Currently, we have three administrators and more than 5,000 end-users through our public website.

We have tried to scale. The Western side of migration is very easy in terms of scalability. Our customers may increase their licensing counts in tandem with their increased performance requirements from the firewall. In this case, they would procure a VMP and the license. The activation of the firewall would be accomplished by the tech in the back-end. The customer would get the migration capabilities and procure the license without experiencing any downtime. 

This is a scalable solution.

I rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten. 

The scalability is good. We haven't experienced any constraint limitations for scaling.

It is scalable.

No issues. It scales linearly with load and no issues.

It is scalable. It has handled the network very well with our growth in the last five years. 

I have not encountered any problems.

It is fairly scalable. We have a couple hundred servers already.

We picked the PA-3050s. They can handle a lot of traffic, so we are nowhere near our limits on it. We are not really touching its full capacity at the moment.

Although I haven't personally tried to scale the solution, my understanding is that it's easy to do so. It's convenient for enterprises. It's my understanding it would scale especially well for enterprises.

The VM-Series is a scalable product.