The company did have a previous solution. I don't know what it was, but the switch to this product was based on the recommendation from the telco.

We have used Cisco and Fortinet. Palo Alto Networks WildFire has better integration capabilities with third-party systems.

When it comes to Palo Alto Networks WildFire, The detection level is huge because we chain multiple devices in between. We have noticed a considerable number of detections in WildFire that were not detected by other devices.

Previously, we were running Cisco's solution, but then we got told from headquarters in the US that we needed to change.

We previously used legacy Cisco ASA. We switched because it was buggy and had no visibility; it was not easy for the rest of my team to use.

We were using Cisco for the last ten years and we wanted to change the product.

We have used different solutions in the past but switched to Palo Alto Networks WildFire due to the fast analysis.

We switched to the solution since it matches our requirements and helps to analyze threats with a free version. 

Palo Alto was the first solution of this type that we used. However, we have recently purchased Cisco Firepower and no longer work with Palo Alto products.

Prior to Firepower being released, Palo Alto was very simple and better than Cisco ASA. Now, however, Firepower is simpler and the support is outstanding. With Cisco, if you have a severity-one outage then it will be less than ten minutes before you get an engineer on the phone to help you.

I have also worked with Check Point and Juniper solutions, and I feel that scalability-wise, Palo Alto is better than the rest, except for perhaps Cisco, where it is neck and neck.

I also have experience with Check Point, Fortinet, and Cisco.

I have prior experience with Cisco Firepower. But, they are very expensive in comparison to Palo Alto.

We are working with a similar product to WildFire at the moment. The features are the same, however, the stability and reliability are better.

We previously used a different solution but it was ineffective and didn't integrate well.

This is a fairly unique feature offered by Palo Alto Networks (may be comparable to FireEye). As such, it was an addition to our existing protection suites.

I am also acquainted with Fortinet.

I haven't used another solution that is better than this one.

We previously used Cisco Networks but we switched to Palo Alto Networks WildFire because it has more options that meet our needs.

We deal with other vendors including Cisco and Fortinet, and we see a trend where more and more companies are implementing a WildFire-type solution into their products.

Fortinet is the market leader in Poland, in part because of their pricing. Another important thing is that if you want to implement a PoC and need a device of any kind, it is readily available from Fortinet. However, with Palo Alto, it cannot be done so quickly.

We have been in contact with Cisco technical support, and it is much easier to contact an engineer than it is with Palo Alto. The Cisco support is really good in Poland.

We have not compared this product with other but we would like to evaluate the options if they are available. 

I forgot what the name or product that used previously, but the reason I choose Palo Alto Networks wildfire is it integrated with Palo Alto Networks NGFW that already used on the network environment

I have previously used Juniper solutions, such as the vSRX model.

I have worked with Cisco, Fortinet, Juniper, CheckPoint, too many of them.

We previously used Fortinet. However, we found it to miss a lot of incoming viruses, because at the time, they had no sandbox style service.

We used to have Netscreen as our favourite, but it went EOL. Being an MSP we have to have expertise with all the devices. Although, Netscreen is our favourite.

There was no solution in this space before Wildfire. Both FireEye and Wildfire came onto the market right around the same time.

I've used Sophos Firewall in the past. They can also block or scan threats. 

We were using another solution. We switched for more features.

I have previous experience with FireEye and Symantec. I find that Symantec is a standalone on an enterprise level secure market, which I cannot say for WildFire.

Previously we used Cisco ASA 5510 and Fortinet. Fortinet was an old version and was phased out due to this. The Cisco ASA was replaced do to the limited capability of the out of box functionality and reporting.

I used Cisco. Palo Alto is better for datacenter and Cisco for perimeter.

We are using Forcepoint, Palo Alto the Next Generation, Cortex, and Panorama.

I have used other similar solutions, such as HP, Checkpoint, and Fortinet.