We performed a comparison between Check Point Power-1 [EOL] and Zscaler Internet Access based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Netgate, Fortinet, OPNsense and others in Firewalls."The SD-WAN function is very developed. It has SD-WAN functionality with security features in one device. We can manage from one single console SD-WAN and the security policy."
"It's super reliable. I don't think I've ever had a reliability issue with it."
"The secure web gateway module and the application control module are valuable. HA operations are very easy."
"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 initial setup of Fortinet FortiGate was straightforward."
"The solution can scale well."
"FortiGate has a very strong unified threat management system."
"I really like the captive portal feature for our guest network. It has nice VLAN features in terms of separating our network. The anti-virus is also good."
"The VPN allows users to connect remotely and securely."
"The protection is most valuable."
"The scanning feature is impressive, because they do not introduce a big latency to the traffic."
"We don't have to buy equipment to use it. And when our engineers set it up on our side, we just configured a few settings and we were in."
"The URL filtering has been the most valuable feature."
"Tech support is good."
"The solution has reduced cyberattacks."
"There is no lag in service when accessing the internet."
"One feature that is valuable to me from an implementation point of view is that it's very easy to implement."
"The price of FortiGate should be reduced because there are some other leading products that are cheaper."
"Fortinet currently has many products bundled with FortiGate including the basic firewall and load balancer, and I think that that they need to have separate product portfolios for each of these specialized services."
"Fortinet needs to overhaul its documentation."
"They can do more tests before they release new versions because I would like to be more assured. We had some experiences where they release something new and great, but some of the old features are disabled or they don't work well, which impacts the product satisfaction. The manufacturer should be able to prove that everything works or not only that it might work. This is applicable to most of the other services, software, and hardware companies. They all should work on this. We cannot trust every new release, such as a beta release, on the first day. We wait for some comments on the forums and from other companies that we know. We always wait a few weeks before we use the updated version. They should also extend the VPN client application, especially for Linux versions. Currently, it has an application for Linux devices, but it doesn't work the way we want to connect to the VPN. They use only the old connection, not the new one. They have VPN client applications for Windows and Mac, but they can add more useful features to better manage the devices and monitor the current health of each device. Such features would be helpful for our company."
"There are some cloud-based features that could be much more flexible than they currently are."
"Fortinet already improved FortiGate, but in the current market, many brands of security devices have improved together. Fortinet still needs to catch up with market standards. Fortinet is lacking in features in comparison to competitors."
"Currently, FortiGate is providing SSL VPN. But they're missing some features that are available in Palo Alto's SSL VPN."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"Multi-factor authentication would have been a plus in security at the time."
"If they can also integrate with the multi-factor authentication to prompt users to do another, second-factor authentication, that would be ideal."
"In terms of user experience, it could be better."
"The solution can be improved by advancing some of the newer technologies such as the DLP feature, and adding email security."
"The solution is expensive. They recently revised the pricing and packaging. Some of our existing customers have been asking for alternate solutions for a lower price."
"The pricing is an issue. It is expensive if you have all of your users in the same location. It is expensive compared to other firewalls on the market."
"The performance needs improvement. Some areas create performance issues and, depending on the use cases, require reconfiguration to perform again."
"Sometimes, support isn't available."
"Zscaler should continue to make the user interface better. They should also improve the backup network and continue to expand it so that it can handle larger numbers of customers."
Earn 20 points
Check Point Power-1 [EOL] doesn't meet the minimum requirements to be ranked in Firewalls with 2 reviews while Zscaler Internet Access is ranked 2nd in Secure Web Gateways (SWG) with 46 reviews. Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is rated 8.0, while Zscaler Internet Access is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Check Point Power-1 [EOL] writes "Good intrusion prevention, firewall, and VPN capabilities". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Zscaler Internet Access writes "Provides integrated CASB and file sandboxing but could be less expensive ". Check Point Power-1 [EOL] is most compared with , whereas Zscaler Internet Access is most compared with Cisco Umbrella, Microsoft Defender for Cloud Apps, Netskope , Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks and Appgate SDP.
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.
