We performed a comparison between Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall and Palo Alto Networks VM-Series based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Firewalls solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The security features are about the best that I've seen anywhere."
"FortiGate is on the cheaper end, and it offers good value."
"The customization potential is quite impressive."
"It blocks the vulnerabilities that can negatively impact us."
"Good performance, stability, and virtual domain ability."
"The most valuable feature is the bundled subscription, which is IPS, TV and web filtering."
"We are using the FortiGate 100D series. VPN, firewall, anti-malware, OTM, and intrusion prevention are useful features."
"Some of the valuable features are the firewall, IPS, web filter, and gateway capabilities. Additionally, it is easy to use and flexible."
"I don't have anything bad to say about the product. I absolutely love it."
"Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is very simple, easy to use, and flexible."
"It is a scalable solution."
"The simplicity of the solution is its most valuable asset. It's very user-friendly."
"The solution offers sandboxing, which can be integrated at any time."
"The support is great. They also have very good categorization. It's very good. It captures a lot of threats."
"The Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is a scalable product."
"The most valuable feature is SD-WAN."
"I like the UI. Most things are accessible from the user interface and it is quite user-friendly. With respect to both VM-based firewalls and physical firewalls, it's easy to create updates."
"It gives us the ease that we are secure. We have set up the proper things that help make our data safe."
"It has the ability to create Palo Alto VM-series using software."
"The most valuable feature is that you can control your traffic flowing out and coming it, allowing you to apply malware and threat protection, as well as vulnerability checks."
"The product provides more visibility into our traffic."
"With the improved visibility we now have, the traffic is being properly monitored, which means that we are better able to manage it. These are improvements that we saw very quickly."
"In Palo Alto the most important feature is the App-ID."
"In AWS, Palo Alto provides us a better view than flow logs for network traffic."
"The pricing could always be better."
"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."
"The updates Fortinet provides are sometimes unstable."
"The debugging and troubleshooting has room for improvement."
"There are some cloud-based features that could be much more flexible than they currently are."
"If they could extend their fabric towards other vendor environments for integration, that would be great."
"Reporting is limited to providing an external appliance for improving the reporting capabilities of the FortiAnalyzer. It does not offer a central management and is also sold separably as an appliance."
"Web security solutions can be improved."
"I would like to see more sizing in the next release, and the roadmap should be clear."
"If I want to allow access to Facebook, yet not allow the user to access videos, then I am not able to do it with this product."
"The endpoint protection capabilities of the product are an area of concern where improvements are required."
"They need to improve their alerts."
"The solution needs to build upon its network functionality. It needs to be a bit smarter."
"Forcepoint is a little difficult to configure compared to its competitors."
"When it comes to a complex deployment, the rules, firewall features, SD-WAN core features, and auto-scaling can cause the device to be not quite stable."
"In larger companies with extensive infrastructure, retrieving logs for a longer period of time can sometimes take a bit longer than desired."
"On the cloud side, they need to come up with more HA solutions to support the multi-region."
"The solution needs to improve its visibility. It's not straightforward to use. Understanding the policies, authorizations, and initializing features requires careful review. The product needs to offer proper training."
"The product could be better in terms of performance than one of its competitors."
"They made only a halfhearted attempt to put in DLP (Data Loss Prevention)."
"The DLP functionality or data classification can be improved in the solution's basic firewalling."
"The utilization monitoring and GUI have room for improvement."
"There is no proper support channel to follow up on cases."
"The user-friendliness of the UI could be improved."
More Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall Pricing and Cost Advice →
Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is ranked 25th in Firewalls with 40 reviews while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is ranked 10th in Firewalls with 52 reviews. Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is rated 7.6, while Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall writes "Provides decent protection for the LAN but complicated interface". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Palo Alto Networks VM-Series writes "Many features are optimized for troubleshooting real-time scenarios, saving a lot of time". Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall is most compared with Palo Alto Networks Advanced Threat Prevention, Check Point NGFW, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks VM-Series is most compared with Azure Firewall, Fortinet FortiGate-VM, Cisco Secure Firewall, Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls and Juniper SRX Series Firewall. See our Forcepoint Next Generation Firewall vs. Palo Alto Networks VM-Series 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.