Fortinet FortiWLM Reviews

We're putting together one of our more complex Fortinet environments. It involves switch-to-switch fiber connections, and it also includes the deployment of outdoor access points to power cameras, in addition to providing WiFi. There is also the deployment of a firewall, and I believe they are going to convert all level two or level one switches to level three. 

It is deployed on-prem.

It is enabling us to have an internet connection to remote locations on the client's property to drive security cameras with complete coverage. It is an incredibly harsh outdoor environment subject to lightning, sun, and heat. It is pretty much the worst tech environment you could ever imagine. When we opened up some of the access points in front of the client to show them, he was absolutely floored or impressed by the manufacturing quality and the durability. It had an instant customer buy and acceptance. They're a Cisco house, so the introduction of this Fortinet was our doing, and so far, it has been doing very well for someone who's new to the Fortinet family.

For me, the ease of setup and the rugged nature in harsh environments are most valuable. So, durability and ease of use have been its best features. 

They need to do more with their marketing. That's what's wrong with them. Nobody knows they do all this other stuff. I love the product. For an enterprise-level system, you never have to explain why you're recommending Fortinet, whereas you might have to do that if you want to use the Ubiquiti Professional or the new Netgear line, but you don't have to explain Fortinet. It has been remarkable to work with.

It would be nice if they had some smaller switches or hubs. They should offer two-port, three-port, or four-port devices so that you don't have to buy an eight-port switch, and you don't have to use an unmanaged element, but their product line is very complete, and I can't say enough about it.

We have been working with this solution for about a year and a half, and our level of experience is growing day by day.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10 in terms of stability.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10 in terms of scalability. We've got it in some retail establishments, such as car dealerships. We use this product a lot with a company called Verkada, which is a cloud-based camera and access control system. It just fits everywhere because of its ease of use, ease of deployment, stability, and performance.

We always opt for 24/7/365 support, and as a result, the phones are answered quickly. We're getting the level two and level three people immediately, and their follow-up is outstanding. Fortinet has been a very good experience.

Fortinet is our lead product, with Aruba being a close second. Both of them have been outstanding to use, and whenever they release a new product, I would like to use it. For example, I'm going to buy a FortiVoice phone system, just because I've had such great success. I'm so pleased with what we've done up to now that I want to see how much more they can do.

Everybody touts Ubiquiti and how great Ubiquiti is, but my number one thing with Ubiquiti is that I don't feel like it's a real enterprise solution. I'm sure a lot would disagree with me, but I find the interface very difficult to use. We are highly impressed with the ease of use of Fortinet. I was using some of the Ubiquiti products, and the reasons for switching were:

• Ease of deployment
• Physical quality in terms of what it feels like in your hand
• 24/7/365 support with hardware replacement plans

As a reseller, we provide support for the systems that we sell, but our objective, as crazy as it sounds, is to build systems that don't fail. If and when they do, the objective is that the replacement device is on-site, a lot of times even before the client realizes that there was an issue. That's kind of impressive.

It was super easy. I would rate it a five out of five in terms of the setup. 

The deployment for this very large Florida location is probably a day or a day and a half job, but that's only because of the number of switches and APs that we have to physically install. Getting it online takes a couple of hours.

I'm the president of a tech company, and I'm not a tech guy. It's so simple and so intuitive that I can deploy the systems, but I've got my guys doing it. We have one or two people for its deployment and maintenance. 

There is very little on the side of maintenance. The biggest challenge is just ensuring the ISP is getting their signal to us. One of the founding principles of a company is architecture. So, whether it's the cable, the method of installation, or the location of the installation, all of these variables contribute to either a successful or a challenging environment post-deployment.

It would be in the realm that if they don't call us, it works. So, not failing in itself is ROI to us. There are a lot of MSPs who want to be engaged with the client. I don't. We consider ourselves a technology hardware reseller. I do not, by any means, position us as an MSP. Although we support the systems we sell, I don't have a room filled with guys answering the phone, and that's by design.

Licensing costs are reasonable. There are so many different types of licenses with Fortinet, but the licensing and the 24/7/365 support are so reasonable that I automatically include it with every transaction. I never line item it without it. There are no additional costs.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10.

We provide wireless access to customers as per the business case. The primary preferences of clients are usually to choose Fortinet, Ubiquiti, or Cisco, as these offer free consumer-based options built into the FortiGate firewall. This reduces costs and provides a unified space where we can deploy valid policies and enable first-time monitoring.

Regarding cost and financials, customers do not need to purchase an additional controller and can scale and expand as their business needs dictate. This is one of the major features in terms of cost and financial management. Additionally, we can from a single console, deploy and push firewall policies, monitor everything, lock and give access, and extend and scale easily. Furthermore, stability, adaptability, performance, and low interference of other frequencies are all managed by radio bands. This is why Fortinet is suitable for the customer.

The Fortinet FortiWLM system can be controlled through the cloud controller, which is convenient when the solution is not installed in our environment, as it allows us to manage the entire WiFi or access points and provides more adaptability.

In comparison to the Extreme and UBNT wireless solutions, we find that Fortinet falls short in terms of validity management, practice management, and firmware arrangement.

The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement.

I would like to have some customized modifications to the radio bands so that we can see which is interfering with the wireless IP. If FortiWLM could provide a tool where the user could generate a heat map of the space in which the FortiWLM is operating, this would be a valuable addition to the solution. Most organizations rely on their existing knowledge of wireless before deploying a wireless solution. When we look at the market, we see many more commercial products which provide comprehensive tools. Fortinet has the basic tool, but I don't use it because it is not flexible enough. If Fortinet could provide us with flexible customization of band management, and add a special dashboard where the user can see other devices and settings, as well as a tool to generate a heat map in the next version, this would greatly improve the solution.

I have been using the solution for one year.

The solution is stable.

The scalability is an eight out of ten.

We have used the solution in enterprise-level organizations but it is primarily for SMBs.

The initial setup is complex, especially with regard to the bad software, complex system integration with the existing infrastructure, integration with multi-factor authentication, and integration with industrial equipment. The solution also supports the industry's portables. However, the UC does not have an extensive list of industries for the portables.

Before implementing, we analyze our customer's requirements and discuss their budget, so we consider the financial aspect. Then, we recommend a customized, scalable, and flexible solution that not only meets their current requirements but also has the potential to last for the next five years. This is why we can plan and execute the solution in such a way that the customer can scale it up for the next five years.

In the last few years, due in part to the impact of COVID on the market, Fortinet has increased its prices by 35 percent.

I give the solution a seven out of ten.

Most of our customers prefer Cisco over Fortinet due to their longevity of almost 40 years and superior security protocols. Cisco has developed its own set of protocols, giving them flexible options to integrate and coordinate with many open-source centers, and providing excellent integration.

Fortinet FortiWLM is a good solution and I recommend it.

The solution is used as a wireless router.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the management.

The technical support response time can use improvement.

The pricing for the solution is expensive and can be improved.

I have been using the solution for eight years.

I give the stability a nine out of ten.

I give the scalability an eight out of ten.

The technical support team is knowledgeable but the response time can be improved.

Positive

I give the initial setup a nine out of ten. I like the way FortiGate devices manage the FortiAPs. Each AP takes between five and ten minutes to adapt to the FortiGate.

The solution is expensive. I give the solution a one out of ten for the price.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

At our company we're using mainly Fortinet, instead of, say, Cisco, for firewalls and other networking solutions that we offer to customers, and right now, we only have one customer who uses FortiWLM. Unfortunately the customer was not able to properly perform a site survey during the initial project, so they now have a few problems with their WiFi network. However, we don't attribute the problems they have encountered to FortiWLM itself. The customer did not follow the instructions during the installation when we asked them to position the access points in specific sections so as not to interfere with each other.

Because of this, our experience with FortiWLM hasn't been very good, and we have not implemented any further FortiWLM solutions for other customers to date. Though, I must emphasize that it was not because of a problem with FortiWLM. It was merely because a proper site survey was not performed from the beginning, and so the positioning of the access points was not optimal.

At the moment, particularly with the COVID-19 situation, the most valuable feature is probably the IPsec VPN, which is easy to implement and manage with Fortinet.

When compared with Sonic Wall and Palo Alto, Fortinet is more straightforward, whereas with the other solutions the procedure to implement the proper IT connections for end users was somewhat more complicated. I think that's a valuable point for Fortinet, when you consider all the SD-WAN technologies that they have. They are straightforward and go well together.

The interface could certainly do with some improvement. We have other customers with WiFi networks, and they always use Ubiquiti. With Ubiquiti, it's a much better user interface, and it is much easier to configure. I managed to get some certificates myself, so I can speak for some features that we need to consider on our wireless networks that are easier to implement with Ubiquiti which aren't so straightforward with Fortinet.

When it comes to Ubiquiti, we have something that we use a lot which is similar to a site survey. Once all the access points are positioned physically inside the office, we can perform a scan on the premises themselves, so the customers can find which channels have more interference, which have less interference, and automatically distribute channels for each access point, and make it so these access points do not cause interference with each other. That feature is extremely useful for us, and it is something that is sorely lacking in Fortinet FortiWLM.

With FortiWLM, we have to perform that type of survey manually, discovering which channels have less interference, and then manually distribute these channels to each access point.

My impressions on stability are good. 

It is certainly scalable.

The tech support is good. I don't have any complaints. We have a lot of experience interacting with them and more often than not they can successfully work with us on solutions.

We have used Sonic Wall and Palo Alto products before, yet we have definitely found Fortinet to be more straightforward.

The setup is easy. Of course, I don't think it's as easy as with Ubiquiti, as that's a big sales point for them. Fortinet still has some catching up to do in this regard, but the setup is not that difficult compared to other solutions such as Meraki.

Our implementations with Fortinet solutions vary with the customer size. For a small to medium company of up to 200-250 employees, I'd say a team of four specialists would be required.

If we are only using FortiGate and FortiWLM, and if we have more products such as for email and for the client, and for the endpoints, then maybe a specialist just for Fortinet, and four to five extra people.

In general, I would say that at least two engineers would be required for a medium-sized company of about 250 employees. 

To save yourself from increased setup and maintenance costs, I highly recommend undertaking a proper site survey from the beginning. 

Fortinet FortiWLM is a good solution, though I must add that it is of paramount importance that whoever implements any WiFi solution ⁠— be it Fortinet or any other solution ⁠— must complete a site survey. In our experience with currently our only FortiWLM customer, we did not have a good experience, but again, it was simply because they did not perform a proper survey, and there's not much more to said. A site survey is very important.

I would rate Fortinet FortiWLM a seven out of ten. 

We use Fortinet FortiWLM in medical offices.

The most valuable features of this solution are its speed, reliability, and integration with the firewall.

Cost is something that could be improved, but you have to pay for what you get.

 I have been dealing with Fortinet FortiWLM for three years.

The series we are using is 431F.

The stability of Fortinet FortiWLM is phenomenal.

The scalability is exceptional. You can integrate into the firewall and have full visibility on a single pane of glass.

Phenomenal. Fortinet's technical support is outstanding.

Previously, we were using Meraki. We are getting better coverage, better throughput, and a more stable connection with Fortinet FortiWLM.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It can be deployed in minutes.

I am a single person responsible to maintain, more than 18 offices and 60 APs. I do everything myself. The single pane of glass and the integration of the complete Fortinet product line, are very easy to deploy and maintain.

The prices are high, but you get what you pay for if you can afford it.

Support contracts typically cost approximately $100.00 per year.

In addition to licensing fees, there are no other costs.

We replaced Meraki, and my advice is that we switched from a mandatory maintenance contract to an optional maintenance contract, which costs significantly less per unit.

I would rate Fortinet FortiWLM a nine out of ten.

I have a friend who used to work at Sun Microsystems and when they were bought by Oracle he moved to Fortinet Switzerland. Now he is the boss of the wireless section of Fortinet Switzerland. We are building an apartment building with 30 floors that is the tallest residential building in the country. The name is Jabee Tower in Dübendorf. We have two penthouse flats there and each flat has 14 wireless access points. That is more access points than you could have with any other normal wifi system; you can not buy this kind of access capability through another vendor.  

We have committed to the technology and now we are dependent on the Fortinet controller and the V2 cell technology which is exclusive to Fortinet. Fortinet obtained this by buying out a company called Meru Systems which is the inventor of the concept of V2 cell. The product allows their product to always maintain the same SSID (Service Set Identifier) for the BSSID (Basic Service Set Identifier) clients using the service. It is a kind of breakthrough in technology. So it is really unique and there is no competition for this type of solution at the moment. That is why Fortinet is the leading manufacturer in this area of cell technology.  

The leading-edge technology was the reason I came to use Fortinet — not only because my friend was working there. But because their technology is very much on the leading edge of the marketplace we have a lot of interesting opportunities.  

The concept of V2R cell services [similar to wifi hotspot technology], is a concept where a controller monitors the access points in the installation. It is possible to reduce the transmission power and that can reduce exposure of users and the community to the electrobiological effects of wifi. The goal is to try to reduce the radio power necessary and to only transmit the signal that you have to transmit to reach the access point.  

In my work, I try to protect people from electronic emissions and V2R is one of my weapons against the current problems with exposure to wifi. You do not have to go blindly like Norway does and transmit with 100 milliwatts or 200 milliwatts of exposure if you have a better solution like V2R.  

So the concepts where the controller is involved must be used in order to reach these goals at this time. In the Aruba product there is also a solution for the controller, but it does not do as much as the Fortinet. So Fortinet is alone on the ground level with this new concept.  

On the other hand, the V2R cell solution has a limited lifespan because we know that wifi six is coming up. Wifi six is solving the transmission problems of wifi roaming in a different way. But for now, there is no competition for the V2R cell.  

Something that can be improved by Fortinet is the organization-wide policy on service contracts. I find that it is a little bit stressful. They have a business model where whatever you buy, you must make a service contract. You can do that for one year or three years or five years. But it seems a little bit like a moneymaking machine rather than a necessity. They require these service contracts and that is not always so well accepted by the clients.  

To judge the circumstances of the market by bigger business clients who can afford these additional fees may not be the best way to create policy. I work mostly with smaller clients on the threshold of breaking into a bigger business landscape. Mostly those clients are private people and for these people, these business requirements Fortinet has in place are not the best way to build up their successes.  

I guess I cannot criticize their practices as failing because the company is obviously successful with it. I understand that they also need to make money for evolution, for research and development to stay competitive. But for the private sector, there is a gap. You have these professional suppliers like Aruba and Fortinet and then you have the small suppliers whose products you can buy in the shop around the corner. There is nothing in between. I think Fortinet could be more friendly toward smaller companies and individuals so they could have success with the products while building their businesses and then they are more likely to continue to use the products later.  

I guess one other improvement they might consider making is with the design of the product. They do not have the most beautiful equipment I have seen in my life. They could hire a designer and the products could be improved substantially in a visual way.  

I have been using this product for about one year.  

The stability is perfect. I have no problems with the product in that way.  

My clients could be any size: small, medium or enterprise companies. It does not matter but for the costs. All size users can be my clients, but for the moment I am mostly involved with private clients. I am involved in electrobiology in my personal endeavors. Wifi is on the corner of our activity because it is part of this field somewhat tangentially, but I am more of a consultant in electrobiology with an interest in how radio transmissions from wifi affects people.  

I had some calls with Fortinet technical support, which is in India, and I had some very good experiences with their team. It was very professional and I got my answers within a reasonable time.  

I'm quite happy with both their online support and telephone support. It is very professional and there is nothing to complain about in that respect.  

Before Fortinet Wireless, I was working with Aruba. Aruba was not bad and we did use it quite a bit before it was bought by HP. But it did not have the same capabilities as Fortinet. We also used ASUS [a name derived from Pegasus] Access Point for some time. I have used modified third-party firmware called Tomato that can help control the behavior of different routers from other manufacturers. I also used DD-WRT [DD is the German car numberplate code for Dresden, Germany; WRT is "Wireless Receiver/Transmitter"] which is another third-party firmware solution.  

When we started, we were using Linksys hardware a lot and then we switched to ASUS hardware. Then we went with this special firmware Tomato released for our ASUS hardware. That was a good solution and it was our main product for a while. It was a progression over time.  

The difficulty of the initial setup probably depends a lot on the level of user who is trying to use it. In the beginning, it took me only one day to do the setup because I had some similar experience. It took me one day for Aruba and it took me one day for Fortinet. The average, intelligent person can learn to set up this solution in a short period of time. But I would not say that it is intuitive for just anyone. You have to learn some theory about the controller and what the controller is doing. You have to read a few manuals. But it is almost intuitive, in general, and easy if you have some experience and are willing to learn. It is not made for a common laborer or for a housewife. It is made for an engineer who can read the manual and understand what is supposed to happen. It is quite usable in that case.  

We do the deployments and implementations ourselves.  

Fortinet would do something with their pricing model to attract smaller business users and eliminate the mandatory service contracts.  

There is currently no competition for the Fortinet product. My experience over time with providing wifi solutions was my evaluation period.  

My advice to people is that the V2R radio solution is very good and that they should give it a try. Get a few access points — the minimum is two — to experience the V2R access concept.  

When I was first playing with the solution, I set up the software controller on a virtual machine in the lab. Just with two access points, one controller and the V2 concept. That was an eye-opening experience. When you see it working, you immediately become a fan. You will make a prayer for this technology.  

What is not so good is that Meru came out with the solution a little too late because now it will have a limited life and it will die. In five years, it will be obsolete. That is the long-term downside, but for the moment there is no alternative.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Fortinet Wireless as a nine-out-of-ten. They could improve a few things like the fact that the access points get a little hot and use a lot of energy. It is running at 30 watts per access point. Also, you need to power the access points over the ethernet, so the ethernet power must be strong. It is not possible to power it from switches. They should do something about the power problem.  

But even with the drawbacks, my recommendation to others would be to give the solution a try.  

I use Fortinet FortiWLM for wireless communication and the internet. 

The solution should improve user capacity. 

I have been working with the solution for three months. 

I rate Fortinet FortiWLM's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. 

Fortinet FortiWLM's installation was easy. 

The tool offers good returns on business. 

Fortinet FortiWLM's pricing is regular and competitive. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten. 

The most valuable features are central management and the many other features available.

The roaming of Fortinet FortiWLM could improve when comparing it to other solutions. We are missing some of the functionality in the controller. Additionally, they should offer more logs instead of using FortiAnalyzer because all the users will not be using the same thing.

I have been using Fortinet FortiWLM for approximately two weeks.

You need to understand the concept first before you can implement the solution. You need to be familiar with networking first to be able to install Fortinet FortiWLM.

I rate Fortinet FortiWLM an eight out of ten.