Clients, in many cases, evaluate for Check Point, Forcepoint, and sometimes Fortinet. Occasionally, they may look at SonicWall, or Palo Alto however, the others are the main big competitors. 

Palo Alto is very expensive as are Check Point and Forcepoint. That's why we sometimes win the projects. We find Fortinet, is very, very hard to beat as they have a lot of market share, have a lot of marketing. Sophos doesn't have that presence, that marketing. Also, when you have to think about prices, Fortinet gives customers everything and it's hard to beat.

The biggest issue I've found with Sophos is the small number of VPNs that we can do compared to a similar appliance with Fortinet or in the same level center. In fact, many other brands offer more VPNs than Sophos.

I have evaluated some other options. It really boils down to price, and I haven't had a chance to explore Palo Alto much. I've played with PortaNet a little bit, but I think that Sophos XG has better features for the price point.

After evaluating SonicWall and considering recommendations from colleagues, friends, and industry professionals, we found that Sophos received positive feedback. Additionally, our own hands-on experience and thorough examination confirmed that Sophos was a suitable choice. Therefore, based on these factors, we made the decision to proceed with Sophos for our requirements.

My company chose Sophos XG over other products in the market, considering that the solution provides its users with good support and a strong firewall.

I also looked at Fortinet, however, from my research, I was told that Sophos had better reporting. With Fortinet, you have to buy a server to handle reporting. With Sophos, this is unnecessary. 

We have evaluated a few different solutions. We've looked at Palo Alto and FortiGate products. In terms of our end-point security, we've also looked at Trend Micro and a few others.

I've compared Check Point, CloudGen Network Security, and Sophos XG previously for clients. Not being biased to any vendor, normally, in this region, what normally happens is the budget. You might recommend Check Point to a customer, however, Check Point is a bit expensive, so you might end up losing the deal. What you would recommend, is Check Point as the Quantum, as the firewall. Sophos is doing quite well in terms of the endpoint for the workstations and the servers, the physical and the virtual. Likely it would be a good idea to recommend Sophos Security. That said, if the client has the budget, you'd recommend Check Point as a firewall. It's always good to do a bit of comparison and advise the client as to what is best for them.

This solution has security features that in other solution you have to purchase them as add-ons, such as malware and email filters. Comparing this solution overall to competitors it is by far the best.

Other than the Barracuda and the Sophos models, I did not evaluate other solutions.

I evaluated all the big players out there before choosing Sophos. I likely evaluated seven different options.

We have evaluated Palo Alto and FortiGate.

We're satisfied with this solution currently. We aren't evaluating any others or looking for a replacement. 

When we were evaluating other solutions we looked at Barracuda and it had an old GUI. This was an issue when we were making decisions between Barracuda and Sophos XG.

The solution is more stable than Cisco, which is why I like it better than the other firewalls.

I evaluated FortiGate but wasn't happy with it. I evaluated another group called WatchGuard. WatchGuard has good features in it, but it's for a smaller business scale than the Sophos clients.

I evaluated Cisco ASA or PIX but now, I use Sophos XG as the firewall. I have confidence in their unit. Before Cyberoam and Sophos, I used FortiGate and Websense for our UTM requirements.

I looked at Cisco, Fortinet, and one of the others, and compared to them, I thought Sophos was the better solution. It seemed to be easier to manage. After the implementation, I could figure out what to do with a Sophos interface. If it was something like Cisco or other vendors, it would be far more complicated to deal with. So, that's one of the reasons why I chose Sophos.

We evaluated Cisco ASA as well as the FortiGate before ultimately choosing Sophos.

I chose Sophos over FortiGate because I'd already had experience with Cyberoam and it was a fairly similar migration in terms of configuration from the UTM over. But in terms of features and capabilities, I think FortiGate is pretty similar to the Sophos. Cisco ASA I choose not to go with because it's much harder to configure. I also needed to be able to have someone other than myself manage it and not need to have someone with CCNP sitting down just to add VPN users etc. I felt that the Sophos solution was a better option because it gave me all the functionality of the ASA, but it's much easier to manage.

I haven't evaluated other options but I know that Fortinet does much more in terms of protection and uses AI. They do a lot more now they have another platform that sits in the cloud and provides clients with AI, whereas Sophos only recently implemented AI. Fortinet has a much better reporting function, but Sophos has stepped up and is now providing the customer with the information they need to feel secure in the product. 

I am currently in the process of evaluating the different firewalls that are available in India.  One of the options is Sophos, and I am also considering others such as SonicWall and Palo Alto.

With Fortinet and SonicWall, there is a limit of 10 people who can simultaneously connect using the VPN.

My company considers Fortinet as an option against Sophos XG.

We looked at FortiGate to see how it performs compared to Sophos. I wouldn't speak for the other vendors because I'm mainly using XG, so I will praise Sophos.

We evaluated Cisco Firepower but we found that Sophos XG was more efficient in terms of cost. As such, we implemented XG.

I was looking at either Cyberoam iNG or Sophos XG.

Normally, my clients look at Fortinet. Both have similar features, and sometimes Sophos is more expensive, or FortiGate is more expensive. It depends. But normally, I have clients that migrate from Fortinet to Sophos. They are used to working with FortiGate without a problem, but the main difference in our case is the support. Because as a company, SUPERNOVATEL, has more experience with Sophos to help our clients immediately. That makes the difference.

I have evaluated several firewall products and I think that Sophos is better in terms of ease of use, performance, and pricing.

The other vendors on the list were Fortinet and Palo Alto. Although it was really great with outstanding features, Palo Alto was far beyond our budget. And as for Fortinet, I was not really happy with the ease of use of the firewall and the features that were coming with it. Sophos was better compared to Fortinet.

Sophos tends to have less performance compared to Fortinet, and Palo Alto solutions.

I began looking into Fortinet solutions simply to compare some features.

SonicWall makes available all the different models, such as TZ and NSA. I am familiar with all the models. Sophos only has an entry-level model, which is actually 87, 107 and 116. 

Fortinet offers the Forti ATF model. 

We evaluated Check Point, Barracuda, and Palo Alto.

SonicWall and FortiGate provide considerably faster performance than Sophos. 

In addition to Sophos, we looked at FortiGate, SonicWall, and Cisco. We were looking for a next-generation firewall, and Cisco was out of range because it was too expensive. We settled on Sophos because we already had the endpoint solution in our environment, and the price was very good as well.

Most of the customers compare Sophos with Fortinet. In comparison to Fortinet, people are more satisfied with Sophos. Sophos has a big customer base in India. Therefore, they are good in terms of performance and customer satisfaction.

The top three solutions that we sell and that the customers consider are Sophos, Palo Alto, and Cisco.

The main difference is the pricing.

We also recommend that customers use FortiGate and Palo Alto, since these solutions are more stable and have more effective bandwidth. 

Yes. Fortinet. However the price is much better to Fortinet.

PaloAlto, FirtiGate

I evaluated several options and sought out advice before selecting Sophos XG.

Before Sophos, we were using Fortinet. Fortinet was also a good solution but Sophos was equipped with more features that we needed. 

The main difference between Sophos XG and Check Point is keylogging and working with clouds. Both FortiGate and Watchguard doesn't have  in log packet analyzer to do so deeply. 

For me personally, Check Point firewall is the best firewall, because the log console is the power key of the firewalls. But Sophos XG is the main challenger of Check Point, I think. You can open the debugging packet analyzer, like a Wireshark, directly in the WEB log console. This function is a powerful tool and must be discovered, because it's very useful for quick debugging.

If I had to rank them, it's Check Point first, second, Sophos XG, and in third with FortiGate and Watchguard. We chose Sophos XG because it's much cheaper than Check Point.

Prior to implementing Sophos, I tried using a solution by Fortinet. However, it was much more expensive.

Yes, FortiGate.

Most of the customers here evaluate FortiGate against Sophos XG. Some of them also evaluate WatchGuard Firebox. In the past, FortiGate had the advantage of having an SD-WAN solution, but now Sophos also has an SD-WAN solution with a graphical user interface.

Sophos XG is very easy to follow and easy to configure, which is something very valuable for me and our customers. It is also very easy to use a site-to-site VPN with certificates, which is another pro. SD-RED devices are one more advantage that Sophos has over other vendors. These devices are very useful for those customers who don't have IT personnel in branch offices. With SD-RED devices, they can connect to the central site. The connection is automatically established with Sophos XG on the site. There is no need to have an IT person on the site.

We haven't chosen any other product, besides Sophos.

I did not evaluate any other options. 

I now have a proof of concept with a FortiGate firewall and we are trying some test cases on it.

We did not evaluate other options before choosing this solution.

I have evaluated other solutions, such as Check Point.

Unlike Cisco, which requires the purchase of different bonds and types, Sophos provides all of the bundles in a single box. 

Only Check Point. That was the one product which I evaluated.

The features in Sophos XG are the same features you would find in Palo Alto or Fortinet.

We evaluated Sophos vs Fortinet and Sophos vs Cisco. 

The cost of Sophos was more competitive compared to the rest. We also considered the management and it was easier to manage than the rest. That's how we came to our conclusion.

We evaluate other options for our customers constantly. We select the product which is best suited to the situation. We evaluate Sophos UTM, Sophos XG, and Meraki.

I know a little about Cisco which is less complicated than Sophos, but I prefer the Sophos dashboard. 

Most of our clients that end up choosing Sophos XG also consider Fortinet. However, Sophos XG has a better user interface. It is also better with managing users, updates, and integrating with Active Directory.