In terms of capabilities, Portnox CORE needs to catch up.

I haven't done a demo on Portnox Clear, so I don't know what capabilities are on there. 

Portnox CORE other NAC solutions are a bit behind. 

FortiNAC.

I didn't compare it recently, but I know that we were comparing it about two years ago with other solutions, such as Forescout. This was the only solution that had on-premise and cloud versions. Portnox is agentless, but I don't know if other solutions are also agentless. I know that Cisco is not agentless, and that's an advantage that Portnox has over Cisco.

Portnox also has an integration with Palo Alto Networks WildFire. When there is a raised level of activity of malware on Palo Alto Networks WildFire, it triggers something on Portnox. Its integration with other solutions was also a strong point.

Six years ago, I evaluated other solutions before choosing this one. This was what we decided on at the time, but maybe today there are other solutions on the market that do the same thing, and maybe in a better way. This solution satisfied us at the time, and since then we have been happy with it. 

Forescout was one of the solutions that I evaluated, and it was more complicated. It may be better today, but at the time it was more complex and it took it a lot more time to integrate into the company. It had false positive issues.

Before we decided on Portnox CORE as a solution, we did try other solutions to compare. I'm talking around six years back, so remembering the reasons for everything isn't that easy. In the end, we decided this was the solution we needed. Today there may be other solutions in the market that do the same thing — maybe in a better way, I don't know — but this solution satisfied us at the time, and since then we're happy with it. There's no reason to explore other options until the solution isn't providing what we need. Even then, it may be an opportunity to explore more of the existing product's capabilities.

One of the products we did evaluate was SportScout. It was more complicated and we found it was more complex to implement at the time. I don't know how it is today. It may be better and improved by simplifying some of the processes involved in the deployment. At the time it was obvious that it would be more complex and take a lot more time to integrate it into the company. It had a false-positive issue.

None.