Re: Fortinet vs. Palo Alto

[Nathaniel Hall <educause-lists () NATHANIELHALL COM>]

IMHO, Fortinet is a perfect example of "you get what you pay for."  I
have been using Fortinets for a little over 6 months and I am not
pleased with them.  Simple things like renaming an object are impossible
if the object is in use.  We have also had problems with throughput and,
as a result, are working on replacing our more critical firewalls with
something different.

My opinion of Palo Alto is different.  While I have not personally used
a Palo Alto device, I have seen them in use and they appear to be a much
better solution that many of the vendors out there.

All that said, I am not an employee or shareholder (AFAIK) of Palo
Alto.  I receive no compensation for the comments made.  In fact, I
prefer a good 'ole Netfilter firewall over anything else.

--
I am many things, but I am not a lawyer, accountant, or agent of the federal, state, or local government.

Nathaniel Hall


On 2/25/2011 8:21 AM, Consolvo, Corbett D wrote:
> Folks,
>
>   We're doing some firewall evaluations and was wondering if anyone
> has any input on Fortinet vs. Palo Alto.  We're looking at them for
> multi-Gb installations (perimeter, data center, possibly dorms) and my
> impression is that Palo Alto is more polished but Fortinet looks to be
> less expensive as well as providing some features (such as
> vulnerability assessment and chassis versions) that Palo Alto
> doesn't.  Any feedback (especially real-world experience) on either or
> both products would certainly be appreciated.