We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Palo Alto Networks K2-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."SSL-VPN is very useful for us and has been very reliable."
"The management console is pretty simple, so anyone who understands networking can initially deploy the solution."
"Fortinet FortiGate is stable. It's used across all the countries, this is the way most multinationals run their system."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of use."
"There is an easy process for configuring it, and it is straightforward to implement the device from scratch."
"I like several features that this product has, such as antivirus and internet navigation inspection. It is also simple to use."
"The web filtering feature and the intrusion protection system are the most valuable. It is a resilient appliance. I never had an issue with it in terms of any security breaches."
"LinkGreat firewall capabilities"
"It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage."
"It has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues."
"It is very easy to use and manage. It is also very easy to scale."
"The dashboard is very intuitive and easy to understand."
"You can use your web browser to do the configuration which is easier than Cisco CLI transcripts."
"When you try to create an IP or when you have an alert about when a website is banned, these features are helpful."
"The product's initial setup phase is very easy."
"Meraki makes it easy to be secure and know where the holes are to fix them. We have been fixing anything that we have ever found for 20 years. We keep up-to-date with firmware upgrades. We just try to stay on top of everything for security, like maintaining updates and getting rid of old systems. I feel like we're on top of it."
"K2-Series' best features include its scalability, which is the best on the market."
"The most valuable feature of Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is the performance which is above their competitors. The throughput they have delivered is good. When we used other solutions they failed the deployment when we were using different rules. They have a theory perform performance light and performance degradation. However, Palo Alto Networks K2-Series never fails in that scenario."
"Everything I could possibly want has already been implanted in the new version."
"The most valuable feature is availability."
"I like the tool's WildFire feature."
"I have found that Palo Alto Networks K2-Series has the best security. They are more user-friendly, older firewalls used to have to be configured using the command-line interface, but in this solution, it can be done in the GUI."
"One of the most valuable features is Palo Alto's firewall management. We find it easier to manage the firewall centrally."
"Palo Alto firewalls are scalable enough. We have about 110 employees in our company, and we are about to expand to 130."
"With the reports, you can see it, and you can get good feelings so upper management can go, "Oh, wow. That looks pretty." However, it's very basic."
"It should provide better visibility over the network and more information in the form of reports for the end users. Its installation should also be easier."
"The UI could be improved."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"This product needs to have an analysis feature, rather than having the analysis done through the integration of a different product."
"In the next release, maybe the documentation on how to use this solution could be improved."
"It is quite new for us, and we need to go more in-depth into the monitoring tools. It provides different features that we need to do what we want. So far, it is okay for us. In terms of improvement, in the future, they can provide a faster implementation of features. Some of the features are first available in other solutions. Fortinet sometimes takes a little bit longer than other solutions, such as Check Point, to implement new features."
"I could not configure sFlow from the FortiGate graphical user interface. I realized that the sFlow configuration is available only from the CLI, and discovered that sFlow is not supported on virtual interfaces, such as VDOM links, IPsec, or GRE."
"Right now, you can postpone the update but eventually, if you don't do the update, it will install the updates automatically for you and that's something that is not working for me."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"We have been having a problem with the VPN. When the energy goes down and is back again, the VPN link doesn't get established. We have to manually turn off the modems and other pieces of equipment and manually establish the VPN. It has been around one month since we have been having this problem, and we don't have enough support from Meraki to solve the problem."
"The problem is that the two licenses do not currently integrate. We have to create separate companies and do an interconnection."
"The client-side VPN is weak. The product could be improved with deployment templates."
"Expensive licensing and firewall stops immediately working if the license is not renewed at expiration date."
"You can only have one tunnel in the whole infrastructure — one tunnel with one device."
"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."
"In the past, we've had trouble with Palo Alto's application filtering not getting it right. I would not be recommending layer 7 application filtering yet."
"I would like to see the threat intelligence capability integrated with other vendors such as Cisco and Forcepoint."
"The reporting functionality in GlobalProtect needs to be improved."
"Palo Alto releases a lot of bug fixes for their firewalls, which means it's necessary to do frequent upgrades. They should work on decreasing their bugs so that upgrades aren't needed so often."
"The solution needs a series of OS changes."
"The ease of management and configuration should be improved."
"The tool needs to improve integration with more products from other vendors. I would like the product to add threat intelligence features as well."
"There are a lot of bugs in this solution."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 57 reviews while Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is ranked 27th in Firewalls with 29 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is rated 8.4. 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 Palo Alto Networks K2-Series writes "Easy to implement and manage, and the documentation is good". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense, whereas Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls. See our Meraki MX vs. Palo Alto Networks K2-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.
