IT Central Station is now PeerSpot: Here's why

Palo Alto Networks K2-Series OverviewUNIXBusinessApplication

Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is #19 ranked solution in best firewalls. PeerSpot users give Palo Alto Networks K2-Series an average rating of 8 out of 10. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is most commonly compared to Juniper SRX: Palo Alto Networks K2-Series vs Juniper SRX. Palo Alto Networks K2-Series is popular among the large enterprise segment, accounting for 58% of users researching this solution on PeerSpot. The top industry researching this solution are professionals from a computer software company, accounting for 33% of all views.
Buyer's Guide

Download the Firewalls Buyer's Guide including reviews and more. Updated: June 2022

What is Palo Alto Networks K2-Series?

Designed to handle growing throughput needs due to increasing amounts of application-, user-, and device-generated data, the K2-Series offers amazing performance and threat prevention capabilities to stop advanced cyberattacks and secure mobile network infrastructure, subscribers, and services.

Palo Alto Networks K2-Series Customers
State of North Dakota, SEGA, Alameda County Office of Education, Temple University, VERGE, CAME
Palo Alto Networks K2-Series Video

Archived Palo Alto Networks K2-Series Reviews (more than two years old)

Filter by:
Filter Reviews
Industry
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Company Size
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Job Level
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Rating
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Considered
Loading...
Filter Unavailable
Order by:
Loading...
  • Date
  • Highest Rating
  • Lowest Rating
  • Review Length
Search:
Showingreviews based on the current filters. Reset all filters
Security Technical Lead at a tech services company with 11-50 employees
Reseller
Easy to manage with a web-based interface, and the WildFire option is helpful
Pros and Cons
  • "This firewall is very good for our customers because they don't have to write their own rules for adding an application."
  • "The reporting functionality in GlobalProtect needs to be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We are a system integrator and this Palo Alto K2-Series is one of the firewall products that we implement for our customers.

What is most valuable?

This firewall is very good for our customers because they don't have to write their own rules for adding an application. The WildFire feature is very good. Using Panorama and the web interface makes it easy to manage.

What needs improvement?

The reporting functionality in GlobalProtect needs to be improved. Other products, such as Check Point, have better reporting features that give more reports. The price of the K2-Series should be lowered. The dashboard could be improved by adding more GUI components.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have about three years of experience with the Palo Alto K2-Series in my company, although I have only been working with this solution for about one year.
Buyer's Guide
Firewalls
June 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Juniper, Cisco and others in Firewalls. Updated: June 2022.
610,812 professionals have used our research since 2012.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto is very stable. In my previous job, I had not faced any stability issues.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

All of the higher-level Palo Alto products are scalable.

How are customer service and support?

We are the first level of support for our customers. If the problem is very complicated and we cannot solve it then we open a case through the distributor, which is the second level. After that, if they cannot solve it, the case is escalated directly to the Palo Alto technical team. Generally, if we cannot solve it then the distributor cannot either.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We also have experience with Check Point firewalls, as well as with solutions from Fortinet. I think that Palo Alto is better than Check Point in terms of threat prevention, and both of these are better than Fortinet. Palo Alto, however, is very expensive compared to Fortinet. Check Point has better reporting and a better dashboard but is more difficult to install. Price-wise, they are similar.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is very easy compared to Check Point. It is not hard for me to install and configure features such as High Availability.

What about the implementation team?

We implement and deploy this solution for our customers. We also provide maintenance and support.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Palo Alto firewalls are very expensive.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
Mina Adel - PeerSpot reviewer
Cyber Security Engineer at Infort
Real User
Easy to implement, has a unique DNS security capability, and the technical support is good
Pros and Cons
  • "Palo Alto has a unique solution for DNS security, which is very good."
  • "The URL Filtering module needs to have more categories added to it."

What is our primary use case?

We are a solution provider and the Palo Alto K2-Series is one of the products that we implement for our clients. Our clients for this work in a variety of sectors.

What is most valuable?

Palo Alto has a unique solution for DNS security, which is very good. It includes signatures for the domains and machine learning functionality. It is currently the most popular feature for our customers.

What needs improvement?

The URL Filtering module needs to have more categories added to it.

The concept of clustering would be of benefit to Palo Alto and it would make it more productive. For example, with Forcepoint, you can cluster two different products.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We have seen no issues with stability.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is good.

How are customer service and technical support?

We are satisfied with the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I am also familiar with the next-generation firewall solution by Forcepoint.

Palo Alto is similar to other commercial firewalls but it has two unique functions. First, the engine is very sophisticated and well suited to the epicenter. It also has good performance. The second area that is unique is DNS Security.

I am familiar with Fortinet products and they are also very good, but they are cheaper than Palo Alto.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward.

While the firewall itself is on-premises, some of the services such as DNS Security and WildFire are cloud-based options that depend on a public cloud or the Palo Alto cloud. There are also options such as Cortext XDR, which has traps that extend to the cloud.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

Pricing is a sensitive issue because the cost is high in this market. If the price were reduced then it would be very good because it will be more competitive with vendors such as Fortinet. In fact, I would say that pricing is the weakest point of this solution.

What other advice do I have?

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
Buyer's Guide
Firewalls
June 2022
Find out what your peers are saying about Palo Alto Networks, Juniper, Cisco and others in Firewalls. Updated: June 2022.
610,812 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Hamada Elewa - PeerSpot reviewer
System Engineer - Security Presales at Raya Integration
Real User
Top 5
Easy to implement and manage, and the documentation is good
Pros and Cons
  • "Overall, this is a very simple and very effective firewall, and I am satisfied with it."
  • "I would like to see the threat intelligence capability integrated with other vendors such as Cisco and Forcepoint."

What is our primary use case?

We are a system integrator and the Palo Alto K2-Series is one of the network solutions that we implement for our clients.

Many of the implementations that I am part of are for the banking sector in Egypt and generally, they are not interested in cloud-based solutions. The K2-Series is well-suited for this use case.

What is most valuable?

This Palo Alto firewall is easy to manage. You just implement it and forget about it. The Panorama management tool is very easy to use.

The documentation is good.

What needs improvement?

The partner support, which is a local company, is not that good and can be improved.

I would like to see the threat intelligence capability integrated with other vendors such as Cisco and Forcepoint. This would effectively be a multi-threat intelligence solution. Along the same lines, it would be useful to share threat signatures with different vendors.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with this solution for more than 18 months.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

All on-premises firewall solutions have an issue with scalability if they aren't designed correctly from day one. You have to measure with consideration for future expansion and include it in your design, otherwise, you will get stuck.

How are customer service and technical support?

There are two categories of support. There is partner support, which in my case is a local company in Egypt. The support provided by the partner is not very good. However, when you purchase vendor support, it is very good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I have experience with similar products from several vendors including Cisco, Juniper, Forcepoint, and Fortinet.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to do.

What about the implementation team?

Our in-house team implements this solution for our customers.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This is an expensive solution, although you will get value for the price.

What other advice do I have?

Palo Alto is the leader in next-generation firewalls. The suitability of it, however, depends on the design, throughput, and the number of sessions.

Overall, this is a very simple and very effective firewall, and I am satisfied with it.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner
CSD Manager at BTC
Reseller
Good virtualization features, antivirus, and technical support
Pros and Cons
  • "The most valuable features are the virtualization of the firewall and the antivirus."
  • "The ease of management and configuration should be improved."

What is our primary use case?

We are a solution provider and this is one of the firewalls that we provide to our customers.

The majority of our customers for Palo Alto products are in the banking industry.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable features are the virtualization of the firewall and the antivirus.

What needs improvement?

The ease of management and configuration should be improved.

The price of the K2 series could be lower.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been familiar with the Palo Alto K2 series for three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a stable firewall.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The scalability is very good.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We work with multiple vendors including Fortinet, Cisco, Juniper, and Palo Alto.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is straightforward but when you have a more advanced configuration, it is more difficult. For example, configuring policies can be complex.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

This solution is expensive compared to other, similar products.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to anybody who is implementing this solution is to ensure that they have the policies correct.

Overall, this is a very good product that is doing well in the market here.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: reseller
Hardware Engineer with 51-200 employees
Real User
A reliable component of our security solution that is easy to set up
Pros and Cons
  • "This is a very reliable firewall and we have never had problems with it."
  • "The technical support, and how they provide it to the client, needs to be improved."

What is our primary use case?

I am a network security engineer and this is one of the products that make up our security solution. We implement this product for our clients.

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is security.

What needs improvement?

The technical support, and how they provide it to the client, needs to be improved. They take too long to provide answers.

I would like to have a statistical report that shows the number of times that each rule is used.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been working with the Palo Alto K2 series for about three years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

This is a very reliable firewall and we have never had problems with it.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

This firewall is scalable. Our clients vary in size. They are small and medium-sized businesses, as well as enterprises.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I deal with a number of different firewalls including solutions by Cisco, Check Point, and Palo Alto.

How was the initial setup?

This is an easy firewall to set up, although the length of time required to deploy depends on a number of variables. For example, a complex environment will be more complex and take longer to configure. This type of setup could take a week but a simpler one could take a day or two.

What about the implementation team?

We have an in-house team for deployment. I can do it by myself, or I can ask my colleagues because several of them can do it as well.

What other advice do I have?

Overall, this is a very good firewall and I would recommend it. With respect to security, it is a perfect solution.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
System Engineer at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Offers more control over the security of your network since it gives a Layer 7 approach view unlike the built traditional firewalls that focuses on layer 4
Pros and Cons
  • "Palo Alto has an approach that makes the configuration easier not only for the customers but also for the IT help for the customers."
  • "They should implement the features that the other firewalls have."

What is most valuable?

Palo Alto has an approach that makes the configuration easier not only for the customers but also for the IT help for the customers. 

What needs improvement?

In terms of what needs improvement, Palo Alto is lacking abilities that other firewalls can do. They disable the current sessions when you think the hardest part is done. They have a workaround for authentication, but then our clients just use the local database of the device itself.

Some of the small to medium businesses are using these features and it would be easier for us to upsell the product up to other networks. Palo Alto Networks is quite a bit higher when it comes to prices. They should implement the features that the other firewalls have.

In the next release, I would like for them to include a checkbox where the user could disable concurrent users of the portal.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using Palo Alto Networks K2-Series for six months. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

When it comes to bug fixes, bugs will be fixed through a software upgrade or another fix.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Scalability is easy to do because we just have to know the number of users.

How are customer service and technical support?

If I'm going to rate the support of Palo Alto, I would give it an 8 out of ten because they have good engineers, but sometimes I think that they take too long to respond to my queries. But most of them are very good.

How was the initial setup?

The initial setup is easy. I have very little knowledge really in procedures, but I could connect to the internet and it was easy to follow when initially configuring the firewall.

The time to configure will depend on the client. If the client is just a small to medium business it will only take a day or two to configure it.

What other advice do I have?

My advice to someone considering this solution would be that it's okay to spend a bit higher on your security products because Palo Alto is a bit more expensive than other products, but it is definitely worth it. The granularity of Palo Alto gives you more control over the security of your network.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Security Solutions Architect at a tech services company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Clear visibility with good integrations; additional dedicated reporting would be useful
Pros and Cons
  • "Simple integrations with the domain controllers and other inventories"
  • "Palo Alto doesn't have extended visibility to the end point in their firewalls."

What is our primary use case?

Until recently, most of my time was spent implementing this product and our company still does that. As a security solutions architect, I'm now more focused on the architecture and that side of things. We're partners with Palo Alto. 

What is most valuable?

It's a very good product, simple to use. The visibility is very, very important, and that's good with Palo Alto. The solution has simple integrations with the domain controllers and other inventories, which the endpoint traps by cloud which is very important. It's an easy firewall, very easy to configure, to monitor, and to use. It's easier than Forte, for example. 

What needs improvement?

The solution could be improved with more dedicated reporting about the user's context. For example, if I need to have a summarized report that includes uses as well as consolidating the user's activities, threads and applications on the endpoint machine, Palo Alto does not have the visibility for the endpoint in their firewalls. If I want to have a report from the firewall that summarizes user application from the user side, rather than the server side, Palo Alto software does not have that information.

Other vendors, such as Cisco, have that in their profile. You can generate a report from Cisco firewall and it will tell you that you're using the internet, and using Firefox or Google Chrome. Palo Alto doesn't have that extended visibility to the end point. 

It would be the same for additional features - I need to have the visibility of the endpoint application, endpoint context. It's an innate feature in Cisco firewalls. I don't like the style of Forte, for example. It has email spam over the firewall. I don't like this feature, and I don't like to have features that are not really good for out of the box. What Forte does have that is good is an explicit proxy capability and Palo Alto could include that.

For how long have I used the solution?

I've been using this solution for more than 10 years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

Palo Alto is stable. They used to have some issues but now they're good. All software has a vulnerability, but stability here is fine.


What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It never used to be scalable but they've recently added a cluster mechanism so you can scale as much as you need. I've spoken to them and they're going to make an announcement about it later in the month if they haven't already. 

How are customer service and technical support?

Palo Alto support is good, I contact them all the time. They have two kinds of support: Premium, which allows you to contact the vendor directly, they open the case, and you communicate with Palo Alto and they'll help you on the spot. There is also Partner support. I would not recommend that to anyone. 

How was the initial setup?

Palo Alto is the easiest solution in this field to implement. 

What about the implementation team?

Implementation depends on the use case. For example, if you implement on the edge, or you implement on-prem, or you implement on the internet, it's different from implementing to the data center. It's generally a quick process. It might take around two weeks, depending on the number of applications in the data center. If you're using solutions like Forte or Cisco, they will take longer. 

The number of people required to implement also varies depending on how you plan to implement - whether over the internet or if you deploy through the application theme. It requires communication between all parties. 

What other advice do I have?

It's a good product. I would suggest people think about the design, the architecture, what they have and the applications. If they have a different kind of firewall, if they have an internet firewall, they can use the Palo Alto tool. Or they can use something else depending on what they have on their network.

I recommend Palo Alto because it's a platform as well as a firewall and it has a lot of features. I would suggest testing the features and trying to get all the benefits of all the functions in the box. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

Public Cloud
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: Partner
Network Engineer at a international affairs institute with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Good availability and technical support, but the price needs to be lowered

What is most valuable?

The most valuable feature is availability.

What needs improvement?

There are a lot of bugs in this solution.

For how long have I used the solution?

We have been using this solution for three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

We have approximately 3,000 users and we have no plans to increase our usage at this time.

How are customer service and technical support?

I am satisfied with the technical support.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We are also using Cisco Firewall products.

How was the initial setup?

We have installed many firewalls and continue to do so on an ongoing basis. The biggest one took perhaps three months.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The price of this solution is too high.

What other advice do I have?

This is a product that I would recommend. My advice to anybody who is implementing it is to make sure that you have full control over all of the features that you are using.

Overall, the features are very good but the price is too high.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Maaz Khan - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Security & Virtualization at a financial services firm with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
IPS system is the strongest you can get and it has good decryption
Pros and Cons
  • "The IPS system is the best in the field."
  • "Higher levels of support are excellent but new users may need additional options."

What is our primary use case?

The primary use for this solution depends on the preference of a customer and to some extent their existing environment.  

We have to establish things like:  

  • what are the business requirements  
  • how we can utilize what is existing or if the client needs to upgrade equipment  
  • what kind of servers do we put in  
  • what kind of servers does he have on cloud  
  • what kind of servers do we have on-premises  

So it all depends on the customer's requirements. If a query comes up with a client, I am happy to answer that and provide a resolution but the situation needs to consider specific needs.  

What is most valuable?

The thing I like the most about Palo Alto is that the IPS system is the strongest you can get. Even if you check with resources like the NSS Labs or Gardner — anywhere else — they all say it has the strongest IPS. It holds true even over the past five years. They are the leaders in the field.  

The reason I believe in my eyes that the IPS is the most valuable feature in Palo Alto is that the IPS is basically protecting everything. I think every two or three hours the database for the IPS signatures gets updated.  

One more feature of Palo Alto, which is not in Fortinet if you compare, is decryption. Palo Alto firewalls are doing SSL inspection and they are doing decryption as well. If we need SSL inbound inspection it is available in Palo Alto but Fortinet does not have this feature. They are not doing SSL inbound inspection. It is one more thing I would like to include as a positive feature of Palo Alto in my opinion.  

What needs improvement?

There is not really anything that needs to be improved in the product. It might be nice if it were possible for newer users to get a higher level of support.  

For how long have I used the solution?

The company I work for now is a business I more recently joined. It has been about two years with the company but I have been dealing with Palo Alto products for 10 years now.  

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

We are talking about a firewall and we are not talking about a simple machine. We are talking about a machine that is not something you can just make simple. We are not talking about a general machine, so it does not really have general features. It does have multiple features. It does have processing engines — the parallel processing of Palo Alto — which is great. The stability will depend on the configuration and use. You really only have two options. You can either go for Palo Alto, or with Fortinet. These are the leaders of network security right now, so I guess those are stable or they would not be popular.  

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Palo Alto has got a lot of customers now — even in the middle East. Almost every version has been scalable. That is the main reason that people are buying the product. I am satisfied with the scalability.  

How are customer service and technical support?

The quality of technical support usually depends on your support level. If your support level is 24/7 365 then obviously your support is going to be perfect. But if you did not purchase that support, you will have some other level of support which is not 365 days. For example, they have an option for eight-by-seven which is eight hours per day seven days a week or something like that. The eight-by-seven support is not good in that case if you need it often or at times when it is not available.  

I have worked for Palo Alto as well as consulting about their products and they are really good at what they are doing, but there are pros and cons for every product. This applies especially to the goals when it comes to support. Most of the customers are not educated enough to do hands-on technical stuff on a product that is new for them every time even if they have experience with similar products. They need support because the basic concepts are essentially the same for firewalls everywhere, but the operating system and the way it does the processing is different for every type of firewall. So new users of Palo Alto may require support to set up most of the things, and if a user does not have the level of support he needs, he will be facing issues. He will not be able to finish his work on time.  

I really feel that all products have some level of technical support issues. Every product has pros and cons and even in the support level. A lot of times we will not find support in our same region. It would be located in different regions. So it happens to be pretty much normal for IT. People probably do not feel that is a good issue to face, but issues in the support are actually fine. That is manageable.  

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I do have experience using next-generation firewalls, traditional firewalls, NDN (Named Data Networking) firewalls, distributed firewalls, and NSX. We still use various products but I prefer to use Palo Alto because of its capabilities.  

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I am actually satisfied with the pricing of Palo Alto even though it is expensive. If you are talking about using products by a leader in the field and it is a bit expensive compared to other vendors, then that is totally fine for me because you are not compromising your security. In many other cases — like if there are budget issues — the companies can always go for Fortinet. It is also a good firewall, but it is cheaper. If you have got the budget to purchase Palo Alto, get it. If you do not have the budget, go for Fortinet or any other firewall.  

Which other solutions did I evaluate?

When we were looking for some different solutions, I was looking for comparisons between AlgoSec's firewall and others. I have been trying to research basically right now before purchasing another solution. We are looking for firewall management. We have multiple-vendor firewalls and we are looking to manage them from one console. From there I can manage all my multi-vendor firewalls, DMZ, internal firewalls, group firewalls, et cetera. That is why I was looking at AlgoSec, because it is capable of doing re-certification as well as integrating with NSX as well. There are a lot of things it can do. AlgoSec seems to meet my basic requirements for the solution.  

We are using multiple vendors like Cisco, Palo Alto, Fortinet, and Juniper. We are not limited to one vendor. We have different environments and different firewalls for each environment.  

But mostly, in the current market over here, the clients are preferring to go with Palo Alto as a DC (Data Center) firewall to use internally because IPS (Intrusion Prevention System) is really strong. As for Fortinet, people are preferring that as a solution for DMZ.  

What other advice do I have?

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would give Palo Alto a rating of nine-out-of-ten.  

I would not give the product a ten and it is not really because there are additional features can be included to make it a perfect ten. Nobody is perfect. Based on smaller support issues is not really something I can rate a product on. Based on their performance in being a leader of these technologies and the leaders and the inventors of next-generation firewalls — based on that, I am giving them a nine. They have better processing which Palo Alto is the only one doing. Based on that and IPS system I give them a nine. And because I am not a perfect guy, I keep one Mark.  

Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
IT Specialist at a transportation company with 10,001+ employees
Real User
Reliable, easy to use, and offers strong security feaures
Pros and Cons
  • "Palo Alto has better and finer controls than, say, Cisco or Check Point."
  • "The solution needs a series of OS changes."

What is our primary use case?

The solution was a firewall that bridged the internal systems with their DMC equipment and/or restricted systems access that wasn't generally available to anyone outside of the organization.

How has it helped my organization?

The solution gets the access controls down to an even more precise part of the network traffic. It's not just any user going to an IP address or going to a port to get on the network. It's very thorough.

What is most valuable?

Our organization liked the fact that it wasn't just firewalls that handled addresses and ports. It also handles actual URL inspections. 

The solution is at the cutting edge of technology. 

The solution has good at controlling restricted access.

Palo Alto has better and finer controls than, say, Cisco or Check Point.

The solution is very strong from a security standpoint.

What needs improvement?

It's like anything else. What's good today might not be in a day, a week, a month, etc. The solution needs to constantly be adapting and updating.

The solution needs a series of OS changes.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using the solution for five years.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The stability of the solution is rather excellent. It is really stable unless somebody messes up a configuration. We didn't face any bugs or crashes or have any issues with glitches.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

The solution was scalable for our purposes. We distributed it to three or four different locations and these were all internal edge firewalls. It wasn't more than a half a day to get any new location up, once the network equipment was in place. (For example, switch hardware, cables, etc.). We would just bring in the hardware, set it up, connect to it, and finish turning it on.

How are customer service and technical support?

The technical support is excellent. There haven't been problems that they couldn't resolve quickly. Pretty much are all cases that we had were dealt with to our satisfaction.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

Prior to Palo Alto, we had been using Check Point. There wasn't a technical reason that we switched. As an organization, we just periodically switch technologies.

How was the initial setup?

I can't really answer any questions related to the initial setup as there was another person who handled it. However, I do believe it was straightforward for them. My understanding was that deployment only took a day. It wasn't a long process.

What about the implementation team?

For the initial deployment, I'm pretty sure they used a subject matter expert. After that, the organization did not need outside assistance. One of our own team members ended up becoming the subject matter expert for a lot of the implementation strategy.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I don't have an idea of what the licensing costs are.

What other advice do I have?

I'd advise companies considering setting up the solution to make sure they have a trained team. If the team doesn't have any expertise with this type of firewall, then they've got to take some training. The training's pretty good and once you understand the concepts, it's pretty quick to put together. 

At the time we implemented it, it was easier than Check Point and the Check Point had a lot of similar capabilities. It also offered finer filtering on what was going to be allowed through various parts of the firewall ports. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten due to its reliability and ease, and the consistency of configuration.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.