Palo Alto NG Firewalls Pricing and License Cost

reviewer1232628
Solutions Architect at a comms service provider with 501-1,000 employees
Palo Alto is a little expensive compared to every other solution, but you get what you pay for. The question I have been asking customers since I became a solutions architect is what the best in security is worth. The problem with people seeking security solutions is thinking that all solutions are the same, thinking the newest technology solutions are best and thinking cost-first. A better way to think about it would be how expensive a break-in is. If I am shopping around for a firewall solution and I see I have to pay a lot per year for Palo Alto and I see Meraki is a much lower price, I might be attracted by the less expensive product. When it is deployed, we get broken into and lose $10 million worth of design documents. It may be quite possible that break-in could have been avoided by paying more for a better security solution. Because I went the cheap route, I lost many times what I 'saved.' For possibilities like this alone, it is hard to put a price on security. Take a deeper look at what happens when you try to save money on security. Meraki does SD-WAN (Software-defined Wide Area Network). That is touted as fantastic because the client is going to save a whole lot of money because they don't need MPLS (Multi-Protocol Label Switching) anymore. But the reality behind it is, there is absolutely no application acceleration, no data deduplication, and no forward error correction. Forward error correction is extremely important when you're using a device between points. But Meraki sells its devices for nickels or pennies on the dollar in comparison to other security solutions. Only then you only learn the lesson of what happens when you go cheap. Your network gets broken into more easily because of the inherent exposure in SD-WAN and it goes down a lot. If you have sales offices and those sales offices have Meraki firewalls, the device may observe a problem out on the internet. When it does, the Meraki's failover results in an outage. With Meraki, failover to a better link takes Meraki 30-seconds. Whether it is a 30-minute failover or 30-second failover, you can drop a call. If you are cold calling and you dropped a call, that's a problem. It is impossible to say how much money you might lose. For example, if my company sells microchips and that call was going to develop into a $40 million sale, that sale is gone. It is gone because of the small comparative cost savings in security and the instability of the solution you chose to use. But a 30-second outage every single time a router is withdrawn across the internet means your phone is going to ring if you are the IT Director, and you will eventually lose your job. The costs for Palo Alto are structured in a similar way to other products. With Palo Alto you can do one, two, three and five years contracts. It is the same thing with Fortinet and Meraki. Hardware cost is very different than the application license. The hardware maintenance agreement is separate. With all of the firewall solutions, you will pay for a hardware maintenance agreement. That protects the hardware itself. That is an annual billing and separate from the software in all cases. Nobody bills for firewalls on a monthly basis. Even the VM version of the Palo Alto is billed per year. Using that license you can build up a VPN that forces all default traffic to a particular device before it goes out to the internet. It is comparatively pretty cheap in practice, and it works. It works well because you only need one piece of hardware. Build the server and start slicing out VMs. Then it becomes possible for everybody in a network to be protected by Palo Altos security at a lower cost. View full review »
Jonny Su
IS&S Europe and Global Infrastructure Manager at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
It's a bit pricey. View full review »
Mahmoud Salaheldin
Security Unit Manager at EEMC
In terms of pricing, every model has a license. For example a small model, the license around 1,000 USD. The next one around 2,000 USD. The next range is 11,000 USD to 13,000 USD. It's expensive compared to PaloAlto competitors. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Sophos and others in Firewalls. Updated: January 2020.
397,717 professionals have used our research since 2012.
reviewer1132443
User
It will be worth your time to hire a contractor to set it up and configure it for you, especially if you are not very knowledgeable with PA firewalls. View full review »
Rakesh Rawat
Network Engineer at Acliv Technologies Pvt Ltd
Pricing is yearly, but it depends. You could pay on a yearly basis or every three years. If you want to add a device or two, there would be an additional cost. Also, if you want to do an assessment or another similar add-on you have to pay accordingly for the additional service. View full review »
Kumar_Rajesh
Vice President & Head Technology Transition at a tech services company with 10,001+ employees
I think, if you compare, they're a little costly next to Cisco of Check Point, but they offer a lot of other additional features to look at. The licensing is annual, and there aren't any additional fees on top of that. View full review »
Jean Maurice Prosper
Chief Executive Officer at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
I would advise anyone to go ahead and understand exactly what they need. It's not because Palo Alto's cost is a little less. Depending on use, it's expensive. So they should understand the requirements first, before going with Palo Alto. View full review »
Aleksandar Jovanovic
System Engineer with 51-200 employees
If you have some network experience then you can set it up on your own, with no setup costs. Don't buy a device with more power than you really need, because licensing depends on the cost of the box you have. View full review »
EmreBektas
Senior Technical Consultant at Exclusive GRP
Licensing is on a three year basis. Customers prefer one to three years. Licencing is pretty expensive. Check Point is cheaper than Palo Alto. There's also an international license. If a customer wants to control different things, they will need an extra license. View full review »
NGfrwall677
Sales Engineer at a wholesaler/distributor with 51-200 employees
At our company, we sell the solution for another vendor, and they sell to another vendor. So our pricing is more expensive than other vendors. View full review »
Partnerf4b9
Partner at a tech services company with 51-200 employees
Annually, the licensing costs are too much. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Fortinet, Sophos and others in Firewalls. Updated: January 2020.
397,717 professionals have used our research since 2012.