WatchGuard Firebox Previous Solutions

IT Manager at a engineering company
We didn't have anything like this before, so it's not necessarily saving me time, but it did add a whole other level of security to our network, which we really appreciate. We had a small-business Cisco basic solution. They called it a security router, but it was just a small device that sat on the shelf and which mostly provided internet access. It had very simple firewall controls: two or three check-boxes to do basic filtering. So we did have something, but it was nowhere near the level of the WatchGuard. We switched to WatchGuard because we did not have a UTM device like we do with WatchGuard. We needed to upgrade the old device because it wasn't performing well anyway. I suggested that we needed something more appropriate, or with more layers of security than what our other small, entry-level device was offering. We did review solutions from a few other firewall vendors and WatchGuard offered, in my opinion, the best protection for the cost. View full review »
Joseph Jansen
IT Specialist at Art Students League
We were looking for a solution. The engineer that I had knew of WatchGuard and thought it was probably a good idea, and that was the whole strategy. He had worked with it before and he was the lead engineer when we implemented it. He was right about WatchGuard, it is a good product. We were using Ciscos. They were aged and out of date. They were pretty well done. Our options were to get new Ciscos and get them configured. Of course the deployment and hardware were expensive. And the maintenance or the management, in the long run, was much more expensive. With the WatchGuard, the initial hardware was less expensive. And the implementation, because it didn't require as much training, was much less expensive. And the management is much less. When I say "much less," I'm talking about 25 percent of the cost of what the similar Cisco would be. View full review »
Hiro Amano
IT Manager at Yamazen Inc
We were using Cisco Professional Services whenever we had to tweak our IP forms or QoS and those advanced types of changes. The outside consultants were costing us money. With WatchGuard we can do the setup by ourselves. We tried it and found we could do it. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about WatchGuard, Fortinet, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: September 2019.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Jon Leib
Information Technology Specialist at a healthcare company with 51-200 employees
We were just using on system firewalls. We were getting to the point where we needed to consider a network-based solution of a physical firewall. WatchGuard came highly recommended from our consultants when we partnered with POA. View full review »
IT Manager at Horizon Forest Products
We had a third-party MPLS network that managed all of the cloud-based software but it was very expensive. It was similar in effect, but it was a third-party, as opposed to WatchGuard which is self-managed. The main reason we switched was the pricing. View full review »
Richard Marcin
Sr. Systems Administrator at a individual & family service with 201-500 employees
I moved from FortiGate. The reasons i switched include price - WatchGuard is a lot more cost-effective than FortiGate - and complexity. FortiGate is very complicated, had little documentation which relied heavily on cookbooks, and a lot of command-line required to get some common things to work. WatchGuard is very well-documented and everything fits within their configuration. Nothing that I've encountered has to be done through the command line. And when your subscription expires on the WatchGuard, it will still pass traffic, if you configure it to. FortiGate will only allow one connection out. View full review »
Joseph Redmond
Woodworker at Creative Woodworking NW
I used Ubiquity. I switched because it was not stable and it would not provide a lot of the services that I needed. View full review »
John Giacco
Network Administrator at Peace Bridge
We switched from WatchGuard's previous model due to age of hardware. We went from something that was seven or eight years old to something from the last year or two. View full review »
Rick Phillips
IT Manager at IDI Distributors Inc.
Previously, I built a Linux box. View full review »
Shaun Sheng
Technical Support at Dataworld Computer Center
We used an older model of the WatchGuard solution, the T50 e-series, but we have replaced it. We received a discount on a bigger unit from Fortinet. However, we recently sold a WatchGuard M200 and I had the opportunity to use the product. Comparing what I see now to what it was before, there are a lot of good changes. Not so many in the GUI, so there is familiarity there, but I think that it is faster now. My customer for this solution did not previously have a firewall. It was just an open internet router. View full review »
John Rhines
Network Administrator at Advanced Software Designs
We tried a software-based solution. I don't even remember what it was now. View full review »
John Farmer
Manager/Senior Systems Administrator at a tech services company
We were using Juniper previously. WatchGuard’s interface was much easier to use and navigate. View full review »
Ryan Baskharoon
Operations Manager at DLL Technologies
I used a Sophos firewall that was already installed when we took over the account. The Sophos Web GUI is not that easy to navigate and completely different from most of the other firewalls out there. We switched because I professionally feel that the WatchGuard security products are superior over most of the other brands out there and their Web GUI is extremely easy to navigate and use. View full review »
Owner at
I've had WatchGuard ever since I put my network together. All I've used is WatchGuard. They were discontinuing support for the last one that I had. Therefore, I had to upgrade to the M200. View full review »
COO/CTO at a pharma/biotech company with 11-50 employees
I previously used FortiGate. I moved from the FortiGate brand on account of when you turn on all of the FortiGate capabilities (80-C & 90-D), the protection is active but your data speeds drop significantly. We had a Verizon FiOS fiber optic true gigabit subscription. I noticed data rate drops as our 3rd party support team also noticed. Upon system review, the function of the reduced data speeds was the Fortigate capacity. We were literally locking up where we couldn't communicate. So, I went with the WatchGuard XTM T-70. View full review »
Roman Laminin
Technical Consultant at Rainbow Security
I have experience with Check Point UTM, and I find that this application has approximately the same functionality, but it is cheaper. View full review »
CFO at a tech vendor with 11-50 employees
We previously used Juniper and SonicWall. Switched at the time because we had IT personnel working for us with WatchGuard expertise and preference. View full review »
Find out what your peers are saying about WatchGuard, Fortinet, pfSense and others in Firewalls. Updated: September 2019.
371,062 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Sign Up with Email