SonicWall TZ Reviews

We use SonicWall for the connectivity it provides. We are customers of SonicWall and I work in network support.

The VPN connection is the most valuable feature for us. For me, it's all good - implementation and data tools are also good.

The GUI interface could be improved. It would make a difference if they could update that. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

I've had some problems with the VPN connection but I think stability is good.

Most of our clients are small companies but the scalability is good. 

I've had good experience with technical support. 

The initial setup was easy for me. 

I also use Fortinet FortiGate and I prefer it to SonicWall. The difference is that SonicWall is a cheaper solution. 

I would recommend this product, I haven't had any problems with it. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We primarily use the solution as a firewall. It's pretty much for content filtering and protection between points.

The solution works very well.

They seem to be protecting themselves, or, at least, I assume they are, when they ask you to go online to enable the device.

The solution is easy to use. The actual setup is pretty easy.

I've found the technical support to be helpful. With all of the specifics, whether it's VPN stuff or the Analyzer products, et cetera, I'll always call for help. 

I'm very comfortable with the product. I know enough to really get to where I need to be and then to get it right. For my customers, I can call and get help if I need to, and it's nice to have that option, however, I'm really quite comfortable overall with its functionality.

There was one complaint I always had in the past. Years ago, you always had to enable the device. You had to go online to enable the device. You had to connect and do that. That was always a thing in my mind: "Well, why do I have to do that? Why do I have to go outside of my network just to do that?" Now, it seems to be less of an issue. However, that's been something that has frustrated me. It's not fixed. It's still the same. It's just something I live with now. I wish you didn't have to go off your network to connect.

I would like the solution to build in more redundancy. I would hope that doesn't come with a price increase, however, it would make the solution that much better.

I've been using the solution for ten years at this point. It's been about a decade, therefore I'm comfortable saying that I've worked with it for a long time.

The solution is largely stable. The one thing I did notice was their VPN connectivity. It hadn't been upgraded for a long time - maybe even years. Whether they were doing stuff with it, I don't know. I just noticed this past last year, they came out with a new VPN client. However, before that, it was a long time. They seem to have sorted it now. I don't know if that means they'll go another extended period without updating again or not.

I haven't grown out of one before, and therefore I haven't really had to scale. In terms of their throughput, we got close on one once. The thing is, if I call an inside connection, he'll get me in touch with his inside tech, which is different from tech support and they'll do some numbers. What my throughput is, the bandwidth I actually have, what I'm working with, et cetera. I seem to be always under. I'm really not in the hundreds of users. It's typically under 100. I work with smaller organizations, and there isn't much need to scale.

I've dealt with technical support in the past. They've been good. I'm satisfied with eh level of support they provide. It's one of the selling points for me. I like to have products with good technical support capabilities.

Most of them were really sharp. I call with some questions sometimes, or I just want to set up a VPN between the buildings or something real quick and I just want to make sure I've got it right. They're just really great at assisting me. I'll say, "Look, am I missing anything?" And they'll look through and say, "This is good, but change this." Their tech support's been excellent. I'd give them a ten out of ten for sure.

I've worked with Symantec and Cisco. I haven't dealt with any Cisco in a few years. I did some Cisco and started to learn how to do certain tasks. I haven't really done much with them as my clients are a bit smaller. Cisco is an awesome product. They are likely the best on the market. However, as I recall, they don't really have a GUI and my clients don't need the size.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's nice and easy. A person or company shouldn't have any issues with the setup.

I'm a reseller.

I tend to use the latest version of the solution. I go with whatever's happening. I'll upgrade when necessary when they go end of life. 

Although it is my understanding that they also have a cloud option, I tend to prefer on-premises deployments. If I need something, I will call my SonicWall rep.

I'd recommend new users try them. They have very good service and they're easy to use.

I'd rate them ten out of ten simply for the fact that I really haven't had any issues with them at all.

Our company provides consultancy services. We are resellers and integrators, and we implement this solution for our customers. I'm a systems engineer.

The solution is important for the main security program of our client companies. 

I like the site categorization and application controls, and I also like the anti-spam feature.

The user interface could be improved. Another issue is that part of the company strategy is that once the license expires, the company blocks features and things slow down. It would be nice if they would provide a free version for small companies. Most companies here in Brazil either don't have the money or their culture is cost-oriented so they don't make large investments in security. They prefer products which are less expensive such as open, source-based firewalls. Having access to a free version would mean that we could create an awareness within the company about the importance of these solutions. Because of the dollar rate, the product is quite expensive for us, whereas in the States it's affordable to spend a few thousand dollars on a solution. 

I've been using this product for six years. 

The solution is not very scalable. We often have to change the appliances. That's the downside on these kinds of projects because it then requires the company to make an additional purchase. Our clients usually have up to 400 users each. 

We don't like the technical support much. There is a long wait time to get a response. 

We also use Fortinet for our clients and we prefer that solution. Fortinet has a better user interface that's easier to use with no hardware charges. It's a more expensive solution but you get what you pay for. The graphical user interface is not so easy with SonicWall. Sophos also has a better user interface.

The initial setup is complex and takes a few hours. It really requires specialized technicians. If the user interface was easier it would be a little less complex to deploy. It means they need to contact companies like ours, but maybe they need to improve their in-house support. 

We think SonicWall is a good product. Sometimes the technicians don't have the expertise to deploy and there can be issues with appliances that are not sized correctly and the appliances get overloaded and it slows down the network. It's not because of the solution, it's the lack of experience.

I would rate this solution a six out of 10. 

We are using this firewall with content filtering and other features. 

We are able to block whatever we want to block by using this product. It provides all required security features, such as content filtering, VPN, in one box. Before switching to SonicWall, we had specified all required features.

It could be made more user friendly.

We have been using SonicWall products for around ten years. Specifically, we have been using SonicWall TZ for the last five years.

It is a stable solution.

It is fine in terms of scalability.

Their technical support is good. For technical support, sometimes we write directly to SonicWall, and they provide the solution. We sometimes also contact our vendor for support. 

We used GajShield previously. The product went down once, and the GajShield team was unable to provide the support. That's why we replaced the product. 

Its installation is very easy. It took around four hours to install it.

Implementation was done by me with some help from the vendor. I also manage this solution and use it on daily basis. We have an AMC contract with SonicWall, and we renew it directly with them. 

Its pricing is okay as compared to other solutions.

We have been using this product for around ten years, and we are very comfortable with this product. I would recommend this product based on your requirements. 

I would rate SonicWall TZ a nine out of ten.

We are a solution provider and the SonicWall TZ firewall is one of the products that we implement for our clients. We also use it for our company.

We are familiar with the console and it is good to work with.

We are very happy with the throughput.

We have been facing issues with reporting. We use to have a free tool for reporting, but now there is a licensing fee. 

I have been using SonicWall TZ for the past eight years.

I would say that SonicWall TZ is stable, as we have not had many issues with it.

We have not needed to scale. 

We regularly have between 60 and 70 users in our company. Our customers for this product are small and medium-sized businesses.

We are very much happy with the support.

We do not often need technical support, but it is available from the local distributor or through the SonicWall portal.

In the future, we will be looking for a cloud-based replacement for this device.

This is a product that we recommend, and also suggest that people upgrade their old devices to this model.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

This firewall makes up part of our security solution.

The most valuable features are security and technical support.

The pricing is of this solution is high and could be reduced to make it more competitive.

The monitoring is a little bit confusing.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for three years.

We have had no problems with stability.

This is a nice product in terms of scalability.

The technical support is good. If I call on the helpline then a technical person will assist us.

The initial setup is very easy. If a person knows some networking and about access levels then they will be able to configure it.

The price is high compared to some other solutions.

My license is about to expire and I am currently searching for a new solution. As we expand and open new offices, I am looking to change the whole setup.

In summary, this is a very good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I find the security we are able to do with the policies to be valuable. The monitoring is valuable as well.

Full monitoring obviously needs to be improved. We need full monitoring covered under the security licensing. The license should include reporting and monitoring. It shouldn't be an add-on, it should just go along with it. They should also make the monitoring easy to manage. Sometimes we need reports. We need some live monitoring decisions on how it's going down. We should take the live report from the SonicWall itself. I want to display the report under our monitor so I can monitor firewalls outside our area.

It's very stable and working fine.

The solution is very scalable. We don't plan to increase the usage right now. We have sufficient coverage. We don't plan future deployment.

I've had a good experience with technical support.

We haven't been using a different solution previously. We were using some antivirus software and some firewall software. We decided to implement SonicWall because it has good support and a good reputation in our area.

Initially, the setup is not so straightforward but we managed to make it work. Deployment was not so fast. It has initially taken two days, then after that, an hour or so. You only need one person for deployment.

Initially, we could only implement with the support from the reseller but then afterwards we handled it by ourselves.

I've seen great ROI since implementing it.

We considered many products, and afterwards, we found SonicWall to be the best solution.

We're using a variety of different models. The solution is very simple and works great and is working fine in the regions that are here.

I would rate the solution a nine out of 10. If it had better reporting functionality, I would give it a 10.

The primary use is for protecting the internet for client-to-search sites. We also use site-to-site VPN, and it segregates the traffic.

We are an integrator and a solution provider. We implement this and other solutions for our customers.

The most valuable features are the UTM, site-to-site VPN, and client-to-site VPN. The site-to-site VPN allows us to connect between the branches. We also use the global VPN client and the local VPN client.

I find most of the features are useful.

In some places, we face problems, especially in the client VPN portion. There are certain places where we are not able to contact. We don't have the lease line, static IP addresses, or dynamic IP addresses. This is an area of concern.

Another thing which I don't like about SonicWall is that it tries to bypass the resellers. That is not good. SonicWall suddenly calls the client, goes to them directly. That is not a good thing.

They should consider working a bit more on their ransomware application.

The solution, once it's configured properly, is unbreakable. The only thing is that on the dynamic DNS we are facing some problems. Fortinet is doing much better, compared to SonicWall because they have their own data center and the dynamic DNS is working better. It provides a much better and more stable VPN. This is dependent upon third-party servers. If their server is down then we're finished. We depend upon them, and we have to wait for some time. This is a big problem.

Scalability-wise, with most of the mid-range solutions, there is no scalability. If you want to upgrade, you have to upgrade it. One good thing about SonicWall is the modular nature of the product. That means you can buy whatever part of the solution you want. That is one beauty of it. If you don't want IPS, you don't have to buy the IPS. That option, that's much better than anybody else.

I would rate technical support a seven out of ten.

We did use a previous solution, but the client wanted to switch. 

The initial setup was complex. It is not so straight forward. It's not tough like others, but still, they can improve on it.

Deployment takes, depending upon the concentration, anywhere from half a day to two days, depending upon the password you need to deal with for all the configuration. If everything is not the same, like you have UTM features and all those things, it may go up to one day, depending upon the configuration. If the training is also added into it, two, three days including training and assistance.

We are a reseller. I've been doing this for three years. I set up most of the firewalls, and we work with the company and also we have direct end users. We work as a consultant for other IT companies.

For deployment, in terms of staff, the maximum you need, depending on the project, would be two to three people. Sometimes it will be enough even to use one or two people. A lot of that depends on requirements. 

License renewals come in around $35,000 to $45,000. That's the retail price.

When it comes to marketing this type of solution to customers, we try to focus more on the Fortinet side. However, if they are already invested in a solution like SonicWall then we continue with the same thing.

If the client is using SonicWall, we use SonicWall as well, for reliability. If they're using Fortinet, we try to use the same thing and try to minimize the cost, that's how we work.

In terms of advice, I would say that you have to look at the entire solution. There are certain things which SonicWall cannot do. SonicWall doesn't support ADSL because of security reasons but sometimes you need it, you want a little bit, you need to have that option to be working. Unfortunately, that option is not there, but sometimes you need it. Therefore, you have to evaluate the requirement.

Also, sometimes the quality is not so good. We have trouble sometimes with SonicWall. Unfortunately, sometimes the normal way of getting into the remote connectivity doesn't work because it's on a data correction. Or we only need to get into another specific connection. SonicWall doesn't support this connection. If we can't access the VPN we can't establish a check with the VPN. There was an incident like that and we had to take another break and then finish the product. You have to evaluate all this and then implement it. It's not possible to just not do something because SonicWall cannot. If it's for security you have to do it, there is no other option.

I would rate this solution between a six and seven out of ten. More work can be done on the servers, and the VPN areas also. It's a little bit confusing on the route side. I think the routes need to be cleaner, better.