IT Manager at a tech services company with 1,001-5,000 employees
MSP
Top 20
2024-01-11T04:05:00Z
Jan 11, 2024
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks has flexible licensing models with different categories. It comes with different features which can be removed if not needed. However, its pricing is high.
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution.
In terms of pricing, considering that it is a two or three years old solution, they should apply big discounts for the next two or three years. This approach will be better for them to capture the market. There are no additional costs. After purchasing and acquiring this solution, we also got support.
System Administrator at a computer software company with 501-1,000 employees
Real User
Top 10
2023-05-04T08:08:00Z
May 4, 2023
It is not cheap. It is expensive. The good thing is that you are able to pay for what you need, but overall, it is not cheap. The pricing is not based on packages. You pay based on the features. If you want DLP, you only pay for DLP. They are very flexible. It is not cheap, but the licensing is flexible. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. I would advise starting with the lowest package or minimum services, and then you can upgrade based on your needs. The full package is not cheap, and you might not need all the features. Their cloud access router could be a little bit cheaper.
Learn what your peers think about Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks. Get advice and tips from experienced pros sharing their opinions. Updated: April 2024.
Prisma Access is one of the best compared to other products on the market. The cost is favorable, and Palo Alto provides a simple architecture, so I recommend the solution to anyone using a different product. There are no hidden costs besides the license; what you see is what you get.
It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors. It is a little bit more expensive than Zscaler, but for a big company, this difference is not so big. Forcepoint has the cheapest support and the cheapest price. Forcepoint has a Cloud Security Gateway solution, but we ran away from them. If you want to go for the cheapest solution, go for Forcepoint and then complain as much as you want.
There's no reason not to buy the enterprise version that gives you unlimited PoPs, but you must understand the limitations you impose on yourself if you do that. If you go crazy, that allowlist will be too big for Kubernetes clusters. The API that pulls the egress IPs allocated to you should be updated by the minute or as often as possible. There's no forewarning of impending changes. That should be built into your CI/CD system so no one needs to update anything manually. It should just flow through. However, you need notifications because it's a slippery slope. If you're adding and changing IPs all the time, who knows what's what anymore.
The pricing is very friendly and that's the reason why we renewed this solution. It was really just based on pricing, and the licensing is also pretty understandable. It's not confusing to figure out your workload and how much you'd be paying for the solution. We chose a mixed infrastructure where we have a bit on-prem and then also a direct cloud version. If you're running it on-prem, you have to meet infrastructure costs for the solution to run on your server in addition to standard licensing costs.
Professional Services Consultant at Infinity Labs India
Real User
Top 10
2022-09-21T06:57:00Z
Sep 21, 2022
I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing.
The most pricey solution is Zscaler, followed by Prisma Access, and then Netskope. The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time. For example, if you go ahead with a one-year subscription, just for testing purposes to see how the whole solution works, and you plan to renew for the next two or three years, you tend to see that the solution gets really costly. We understand that when you purchase a hardware component, the cost goes up because you have a physical asset that depreciates over time. But when you are getting a subscription-based service, the cost should tend to be reduced over time. With Prisma Access, the cost is increasing and that is something beyond any kind of logic. This is something that Palo Alto needs to work on if they want to be competitive in the market.
Sr. Cloud Security Architect at tejain@deloitte.com
Reseller
Top 5
2021-12-05T23:23:00Z
Dec 5, 2021
We created a bill of materials and passed it on to a third party. It probably was WWT, but it was sourced by the client itself. Based on what I have heard from others, it is a pricey solution as compared to its peers, but I am not sure. However, considering the features that it offers, it is a break-even point. You get whatever they are promising.
It's pricey, it's not cheap. But you get what you pay for. My most crucial advice to colleagues who are looking to purchase this product would be to look at it from a 50,000-foot point of view, and then narrow it down to 40,000, 30,000, 20,000, and 10,000. The reason I say that is because, at the 50,000-foot view, the executives care about the pricing and the costing model; it's all about budget and how they can save the organization money. If you are in a high-end organization, this is the product you had better get, hands-down. If you are an executive at a highly visible bank, please get your head out of the sand and see what is best for your organization. If you are a manufacturing company that doesn't need this level of integrative security, go get something else, something cheaper, because you don't need this extensive level of security controls and throughput. But if you want to get the best-of-breed, then Palo Alto's product is what you should definitely get.
Endpoint Security Manager at Catholic Health Initiatives
Real User
2020-10-06T06:57:36Z
Oct 6, 2020
I don't deal with licensing in the company. I'm not sure what the pricing is. My understanding is that it's a bit more expensive only because it's part of the framework of the Palo Alto solution. It's more sensitive than if we just went and got some free VPN or some ad hoc solution, and so it's a bit more costly.
Senior Security Architecture Specialist at a computer software company with 201-500 employees
Reseller
2020-09-27T04:10:13Z
Sep 27, 2020
This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license. We normally sell GlobalProtect bundled with a firewall if the customer wants an endpoint solution.
Consultant at a political organization with 201-500 employees
Consultant
2019-06-26T05:25:00Z
Jun 26, 2019
I think that the Palo Alto solution is very good. The licensing in comparison to other competitors is not really an issue. The price is not low but you can't compare with all the premium firewalls in its range. The licensing cost is about 18,000 euros.
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks provides consistent security for all users and applications across your remote networks. Prisma Access grants users safe access to the cloud and data center applications and the internet as well. In addition, the solution combines all of your security and networking capabilities into a single cloud-delivered platform, enabling flexible hybrid workforces.
Prisma Access can be managed two ways:
Cloud Managed
Panorama Managed
Prisma Access delivers both...
The solution is expensive.
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks has flexible licensing models with different categories. It comes with different features which can be removed if not needed. However, its pricing is high.
Prisma Access by Palo Alto Networks is an expensive solution, especially when compared to other solutions like Cisco. There are no additional charges apart from the standard licensing costs attached to the solution.
I'm still comparing, but the solution is quite expensive.
In terms of pricing, considering that it is a two or three years old solution, they should apply big discounts for the next two or three years. This approach will be better for them to capture the market. There are no additional costs. After purchasing and acquiring this solution, we also got support.
It is not cheap. It is expensive. The good thing is that you are able to pay for what you need, but overall, it is not cheap. The pricing is not based on packages. You pay based on the features. If you want DLP, you only pay for DLP. They are very flexible. It is not cheap, but the licensing is flexible. There are no additional costs in addition to the standard licensing fees. I would advise starting with the lowest package or minimum services, and then you can upgrade based on your needs. The full package is not cheap, and you might not need all the features. Their cloud access router could be a little bit cheaper.
Prisma Access is one of the best compared to other products on the market. The cost is favorable, and Palo Alto provides a simple architecture, so I recommend the solution to anyone using a different product. There are no hidden costs besides the license; what you see is what you get.
It is a little expensive. Because it is one of the best in the market, it is a little bit more expensive than other vendors. It is a little bit more expensive than Zscaler, but for a big company, this difference is not so big. Forcepoint has the cheapest support and the cheapest price. Forcepoint has a Cloud Security Gateway solution, but we ran away from them. If you want to go for the cheapest solution, go for Forcepoint and then complain as much as you want.
There's no reason not to buy the enterprise version that gives you unlimited PoPs, but you must understand the limitations you impose on yourself if you do that. If you go crazy, that allowlist will be too big for Kubernetes clusters. The API that pulls the egress IPs allocated to you should be updated by the minute or as often as possible. There's no forewarning of impending changes. That should be built into your CI/CD system so no one needs to update anything manually. It should just flow through. However, you need notifications because it's a slippery slope. If you're adding and changing IPs all the time, who knows what's what anymore.
The pricing is very friendly and that's the reason why we renewed this solution. It was really just based on pricing, and the licensing is also pretty understandable. It's not confusing to figure out your workload and how much you'd be paying for the solution. We chose a mixed infrastructure where we have a bit on-prem and then also a direct cloud version. If you're running it on-prem, you have to meet infrastructure costs for the solution to run on your server in addition to standard licensing costs.
I would advise choosing your options according to your company's needs. Just go for what you want and do not pay for anything extra in terms of licensing. You need to determine how much bandwidth is required in your company network, and according to that, you should pay for the license. The mobile user license is based on the number of users who are going to use the VPN solution. You need to determine how many mobile users you are going to have in your network, and you should pay according to that. There are no other costs in addition to licensing, but if you go for the consultant services of Palo Alto networks to deliver the solution for you, then you need to pay something extra. That is not a part of licensing.
I'm not involved on the financial side, but I believe the solution is costly.
I'm not involved on the financial side, but I believe the solution is costly.
The most pricey solution is Zscaler, followed by Prisma Access, and then Netskope. The initial prices of Prisma Access were okay. But as soon as you start deploying Palo Alto gear, the support prices and the recurring prices, which are the major operational costs, tend to increase over time. For example, if you go ahead with a one-year subscription, just for testing purposes to see how the whole solution works, and you plan to renew for the next two or three years, you tend to see that the solution gets really costly. We understand that when you purchase a hardware component, the cost goes up because you have a physical asset that depreciates over time. But when you are getting a subscription-based service, the cost should tend to be reduced over time. With Prisma Access, the cost is increasing and that is something beyond any kind of logic. This is something that Palo Alto needs to work on if they want to be competitive in the market.
We created a bill of materials and passed it on to a third party. It probably was WWT, but it was sourced by the client itself. Based on what I have heard from others, it is a pricey solution as compared to its peers, but I am not sure. However, considering the features that it offers, it is a break-even point. You get whatever they are promising.
It's pricey, it's not cheap. But you get what you pay for. My most crucial advice to colleagues who are looking to purchase this product would be to look at it from a 50,000-foot point of view, and then narrow it down to 40,000, 30,000, 20,000, and 10,000. The reason I say that is because, at the 50,000-foot view, the executives care about the pricing and the costing model; it's all about budget and how they can save the organization money. If you are in a high-end organization, this is the product you had better get, hands-down. If you are an executive at a highly visible bank, please get your head out of the sand and see what is best for your organization. If you are a manufacturing company that doesn't need this level of integrative security, go get something else, something cheaper, because you don't need this extensive level of security controls and throughput. But if you want to get the best-of-breed, then Palo Alto's product is what you should definitely get.
The solution requires a license and the technical support has extra costs. The licensing model could improve.
I can't speak to the licensing costs. We had a two-year license, which we are still on.
Prisma Access is a little bit expensive.
I don't deal with licensing in the company. I'm not sure what the pricing is. My understanding is that it's a bit more expensive only because it's part of the framework of the Palo Alto solution. It's more sensitive than if we just went and got some free VPN or some ad hoc solution, and so it's a bit more costly.
This is not an expensive product and everything is included with one license. We normally sell GlobalProtect bundled with a firewall if the customer wants an endpoint solution.
I think that the Palo Alto solution is very good. The licensing in comparison to other competitors is not really an issue. The price is not low but you can't compare with all the premium firewalls in its range. The licensing cost is about 18,000 euros.
Palo Alto is not a cheap product. It's expensive because they provide very good technology.