We performed a comparison between Blue Coat ProxySG [EOL] and Fortinet FortiWAN [EOL] based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about HPE Aruba Networking, Cato Networks, Citrix and others in WAN Optimization."Since the implementation of this solution, the bandwidth has decreased and the performance in terms of Internet access has increased."
"It features intuitive proxy policy deployment using a VPN."
"Proxy Solution and ADN and their integration capability with Blue Coat director are positive features."
"The most valuable feature is optimization."
"The most valuable feature is connectivity."
"It would be great if the product had inbuilt queuing for Quality of Service."
"We cannot automate the product since the IP address can only be assigned after acquisition of the serial number."
"It lacks deployment over multiple platforms and integration with SDN architecture."
"From a security perspective, FortiWAN needs to be improved."
"Having more documentation would be helpful."
Blue Coat ProxySG [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in WAN Optimization while Fortinet FortiWAN [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in WAN Optimization. Blue Coat ProxySG [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Fortinet FortiWAN [EOL] is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Blue Coat ProxySG [EOL] writes "Now we are able to inspect full SSL traffic". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWAN [EOL] writes "Easy to deploy with good connectivity and robustness for managing WAN links". Blue Coat ProxySG [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Fortinet FortiWAN [EOL] is most compared with .
See our list of best WAN Optimization vendors.
We monitor all WAN Optimization 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.
