We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and SonicWall TZ based on our users’ reviews in four categories. After reading the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Users consider Meraki MX devices to be part of a comprehensive next-generation firewall solution with all the advanced security services required for today’s IT marketplace. They say it is also a robust dynamic Unified Threat Management (UTM) tool. Meraki MX offers zero-touch installation, is cloud-based, and can seamlessly integrate with most of today’s popular platforms. Many users feel SonicWall TZ can be bulky and slow and is lacking some key features.
"The threat prevention is the solution's most valuable aspect."
"The solution is stable."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"We have found it to be very reliable and that's why our teams and various users in our company use it as our main firewall every day."
"The application control features, such as Facebook blocking and Spotify blocking, are the most valuable."
"The most important features with FortiGate are the web filter and application controls. We can control our internet usage and use the web filter for application purposes."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is the analytics."
"In terms of security, we have not experienced any security flaws or loopholes, and it has proven to be quite stable."
"The technical support people from Meraki are brilliant."
"The product is quite secure, easy to manage, and well-connected with other devices."
"Managed centrally over the web: You can manages all your Meraki devices in a single account."
"Easy to administer and saves time when you have many smaller locations that you have to manage."
"In a week, we can make new policy and view what all our users did."
"The solution is good for load balancing."
"Real Auto VPN with load balancer without needing a public IP. It is simple and functional."
"It prevents us from being hacked and delivers information about who and where the attack came from."
"Good site categorization and application controls."
"It lets me monitor in live time if someone is 'hogging' bandwidth."
"From our point of view, the most valuable feature was the ease of deployment."
"The most valuable features have been content filtering, and the interface is easy to navigate and to use."
"It's a stable solution."
"The solution's VPN is very good for stability and detecting threats."
"It does exactly what it says on the tin. It is good for protecting the business from being compromised. Its port protection is very good."
"It's been very easy to implement and deploy."
"The room for improvement is about the global delivery time period. Usually I need to wait for almost one month to deliver it overseas. So if you can shorten the deliver time it'd be great."
"Fortinet FortiGate can improve by integrating the web application firewall and the DDoS protection part of the solution. Having a WAF feature, web application firewall, and proxy together would be a good benefit."
"Some of the software stability could improve."
"The command line is complicated, and the interface could be better."
"The process of configuring firewall rules appears excessively complex."
"Its filtering is sometimes too precise or strict. We sometimes have to bypass and authorize some of the sites, but they get blocked. We know that they are trusted sites, but they are blocked, and we don't know why."
"I need user-behavior analytics, to find threat scenarios from inside the organization, insider attacks. That would be very helpful for us. In addition, I would like next-generation features for small and medium businesses. These businesses require UTM, all in one product. Fortinet must include it."
"The routing capability on the FortiGate devices has room for improvement."
"The IPS, the Intrusion Prevention System, can be improved."
"The product could incorporate tools like ThousandEyes into the system so we can see things directly."
"FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki."
"From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy."
"We do not have account managers in our region for the solution. Some governments don't use the product since it is attached to the internet."
"When we do API integrations with Meraki, they have always been hard as well as tedious to build. The data that we want out of the API integrations has been only recently available. Six months ago, it was hard to get someone to build something correctly or useful with Meraki APIs. Recently, they have made more data available on the API, but it is just a start. They need to do more."
"We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick. Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"The solution must provide more ports."
"It would be good if Analyzer would be part of the stock license, so even if a layperson is getting the device, he or she doesn't forgets about ordering the Analyzer because it's already there."
"The solution should provide some additional ports."
"An additional feature that I would like to see is reporting that includes metrics to give me more information about the number of viruses that it has actually detected and interrupted."
"The stability could be a lot better."
"The VPN that is available in the new version is a bit bulky and slower in speed."
"The dashboard needs to be improved."
"There is still room for improvement, and it's not advisable even if the organization has grown."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 58 reviews while SonicWall TZ is ranked 12th in Firewalls with 78 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while SonicWall TZ is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of SonicWall TZ writes "Has efficient user access control feature and good technical support services ". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense and SonicWall NSa, whereas SonicWall TZ is most compared with Sophos XG, Netgate pfSense, SonicWall NSa, WatchGuard Firebox and Cisco Secure Firewall. See our Meraki MX vs. SonicWall TZ report.
See our list of best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Firewalls reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
