Palo Alto Networks Panorama Reviews

We use the solution for long-term traffic blocks when our management needs to receive information on specific events or for theory testing. Panorama sits on the firewall and manages traffic blocking.

The solution is easy to use. 

The central firewall management could be better. 

I've been working with Panorama for two years. 

The solution is stable; we didn't have any downtime.

Our IT department has around four users who manage the solution, and another department has over ten end users.

We contacted technical support in Hong Kong, provided by a local partner of Panorama, and they aren't the best; there is room for improvement.

Another division handled the initial setup, but they said the deployment should be easy as it doesn't require complex tasks. It's simple to open the software and configure the tool.

The solution is relatively cheap; I rate it four out of five for affordability. 

I evaluated another solution, but Panorama is easy to use and deploy, plus the performance is better. I can quickly install policies.

I rate the product seven out of ten. 

The solution is used for VPN, and Firewall protection.

I find the portal, and the filter function to be the most valuable features. I found it easy to learn how to pull information from the logs.

I would like to see more real-world testing before updates and patches are released in the live environment. The last VPN update that was released caused a problem that kicked users out. I would also like to see better documentation. The current documentation is not detailed enough.

I have been using the solution for a month and our organization has been using the solution for about four years.

The solution for the most part appears to be stable. I haven't had any major concerns.

The implementation was through a vendor.

Although I don't have direct knowledge of the setup cost I believe it is mid-range. There is also an additional cost for the VPN service.

I would rate the solution a six out of ten.

I was not part of the initial setup so I don't know how straightforward it was. 

The solution is used across six businesses for both the service and the workstations.

The basic use case is when you have a lot of Palo Alto Networks firewalls. Panorama is a security management tool for all of your Palo Alto Network devices. Every time you create some configurations or when you need to manage a lot of branches with Palo Alto Network devices, and when you need to group these branches to use the policies, the configurations on a group of devices, it's useful. It's easier to use Panorama to manage stuff.

It's user-friendly. Users can easily manage the configurations, the policies, and the objects inside Panorama, inside the Palo Alto Network devices. 

It is really useful for big deployments. It's useful for users that have two devices. 

We have the ability to install Panorama in a public cloud deployment, and of course, Palo Alto also has their own cloud in which you can store the logs of all of your devices and basically get the reporting and get management for these logs through Panorama. Palo Alto has cloud firewalls and they are also manageable through Panorama. This is like a cherry on the top of all of your network security from Palo Alto in your organization.

The setup is easy.

It is not a cheap product. Some kinds of Palo Alto devices can cost a few thousands of dollars, and Panorama will be even higher. For the big customers that have a lot of devices, it is crucial to get all the benefits from the Palo Alto Networks portfolio regarding network security.

For a highly secure environment, they sometimes need only hardware appliances, not a virtual machine. 

Palo Alto Networks was the first vendor in my cybersecurity career. I started to work with Palo Alto Networks at my first job in a small integrator company in Ukraine. I've been working with Panorama for maybe 16 or 17 years. There was a small period of three years between this experience, and now I'm again working with Palo Alto Networks.

It's really stable. We have a public cloud and hardware and we have a virtual one, and all of them are really stable. We have not seen critical issues or a lot of comments from the customers that it is not a stable solution.

It's really scalable. It's based on the number of devices. If you need 25 devices, it will be one license. If you need thousands of devices to manage, it will be another kind of license. It's really scalable and can install the machines with the high availability mode, so it's really stable.

Support answers quickly. I have no issues with Palo Alto Network support. Basically, our company is an Accredited Support Center of the Palo Alto Networks for our customers and basically we are also providing support at the lowest levels. 

It's really straightforward to implement. It's not something where you need some special engineer. Palo Alto has a really great document portal, docs portal, where you can find all the needed information to deploy this. That said, it is really straightforward for any administrator who deployed something before. You just click next, next, next, you just then need to change a key, and that's all.

It's not the cheapest solution. It can be quite expensive. There are other less costly options available on the market.

I am working for an official distributor of Palo Alto Networks.

It is on-premises, and it has cloud abilities too. Public cloud deployments are available.

I can recommend the solution to new users and suggest, firstly, that they choose their mode of Panorama. They need to decide if they will deploy in a public cloud or maybe on-premises. If you have a lot of Palo Alto devices, you will need Panorama. If you have this significant amount of Palo Alto Network devices, when you get Panorama, you will get a lot of features that will make your life easier.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has improved the way my company works, which is why my company uses it.

What I like about Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that it's stable and setting it up isn't complex.

My company's getting whatever it needs from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud, there's an issue with CPU management, and that's an area for improvement. Though the normal data traffic doesn't go through the management interface, whenever there's an increase in the throughput, CPU management becomes high. If you increase the load, CPU management spikes, and it's what needs to be taken care of in Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

I've been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for the past four years.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has good stability. I didn't see any instability from it, though at times, the CPU goes high in terms of usage, and that's what you need to take care of.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a scalable solution.

Technical support for Palo Alto Networks Panorama, in my experience, was initially good, but now the wait time is longer. My company has a dedicated account manager, so it gets support, but in general, the response time is longer.

The initial setup for Palo Alto Networks Panorama was straightforward. I didn't see any complexity. It was a normal firewall configuration. I haven't done any new deployment of Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud environment, it didn't take much time for me, and you can complete a setup within one to two hours.

We implemented Palo Alto Networks Panorama through a vendor team by Palo Alto, specifically for the on-premises deployment, to migrate from Check Point to Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but in the cloud environment, as it is a VM, we did it ourselves.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is deployed everywhere, particularly in the public cloud and on-premises as well.

My company is just a customer of Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but because it's a big company, it has a dedicated account manager in Palo Alto.

My company uses the solution extensively. There are more than six Panoramas. Forty to fifty firewalls are managed currently through Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

I'm rating Palo Alto Networks Panorama nine out of ten. It's a good solution. What would make my rating a ten is if the CPU management spike issue was addressed and if the delayed response of technical support was addressed as well. A few years ago, the response time from support was immediate, but now, there's a delay with the response, even though my company has a dedicated account manager from Palo Alto Networks Panorama, and this makes you think about a midsized company with no account manager in terms of how much time it gets a response from Palo Alto support.

We are a cybersecurity business, so we are a Palo Alto reseller and integrator. We also use Palo Alto to run our firewalls in our own environment. 

It's really the central management component that helps us. From a configuration point of view, when we are implementing it for large organizations where the customer owns a hundred firewalls, it's just easy to manage them all at one central location. I think that's probably one of the best features from a visibility component.

Price is probably one of the biggest things that we struggle with, specifically with Palo, and that's across their whole portfolio. Also, the tech support could be better.

I have been working with this solution for about five years.

The solution is very stable.

The solution is easy to scale.

On a scale of one to five, I would rate the technical support as a four. 

Positive

The setup process is simple and straightforward. 

If I were to rate the pricing of Palo on a scale of one to five, with one being really high and five being a good, reasonable price, I would rate Palo as a three.

We generally compare Palo Alto with the offerings from Check Point because they both seem to have the majority of the market share here in my region.
From a stability point of view, I think Panorama is better. Check Point is struggling with their current software releases along those lines, and Panorama is very good at releasing new features along those lines. Palo is a lot faster than a lot of the competitors on the market.

I would rate Panorama as an eight out of ten.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama has a lot of features.

The price of Palo Alto Networks Panorama could be better.

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for approximately four years.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is stable.

The scalability of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good. We have middle to large enterprises using this solution.

The technical support is very good and they are at the top of the class.

If the customer doesn't have the budget, I recommend Fortinet. It is not the same level as Palo Alto Networks Panorama, but for a budget, it is an advantage. Check Point is a little bit complex, compared to Palo Alto. If the customer is looking for the technical specifications then Palo Alto Networks Panorama is the best. If the customer is on a budget, there are alternatives.

The initial setup of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is easy and takes approximately one day.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a more expensive solution than competitors. They should lower the price to stay competitive.

All my clients are happy and satisfied with the solution. We can strongly recommend it to others.

I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama a nine out of ten.

This solution allows us to centrally manage all devices. It's deployed on-premises.

There are 10,000 employees in my organization. We have two or three data centers across the globe.

It's easy to deploy any software or policies. Even if you have multiple devices across the globe, if you have urgent searching or maybe policy enforcement, you can do it easily.

The interface is easy to understand and manage. It's an intelligent device and can capture any spyware or vulnerabilities.

It's a leader in the market, and they observe the market requirement and upgrade the software accordingly.

The price could be lower. I would like to see remote VPN, like the Cisco client.

I've been working with Panorama for four years.

Panorama is stable.

It's scalable.

Setup isn't simple, but it's easy to migrate from another vendor.

Right now, we use 40 employees to manage the solution.

Cost-wise, it's very expensive. If you want to go with another vendor, Cisco and Fortinet are good for medium-size networks.

I would rate the cost 4 out of 5.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

What's most valuable in Palo Alto Networks Panorama is that it allows us to see the status on the network side, particularly on the endpoint, because we also use it for the internal network.

As the cybersecurity threats have become more aggressive these days, Palo Alto Networks Panorama can still be improved, particularly on the security side, for example, more network management, and penetration test. Improving the security feature for internal endpoints is needed in the solution.

What I'd like to see in the next release of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is more training and more marketing.

I've been distributing Palo Alto Networks Panorama for ten years.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a very stable solution.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is a scalable solution, and we don't have any issues scaling it.

For me, the technical support for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good.

The initial setup for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is not complex.

My company pays for the licensing cost of Palo Alto Networks Panorama yearly, and it's all-inclusive, so there's no need to pay extra for some features.

My company has a partnership with Palo Alto Networks and it is a reseller of Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

The version of Palo Alto Networks Panorama being used would depend on the hardware side and the client, but I cannot remember the exact version. We are on a new version: version eight if I'm not mistaken.

My company has a team for the maintenance of the solution.

My rating for Palo Alto Networks Panorama is eight out of ten.

We are using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for a single pane of glass view of our network. 

Palo Alto Networks Panorama provides many features, such as alerts, traffic monitoring, and logs.

Sometimes in Palo Alto Networks Panorama, we receive issues where it is overloaded and unresponsive. We have issues with accessing the devices due to a slow response from Panorama.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama should be more robust and resilient. 

I have been using Palo Alto Networks Panorama for approximately two years.

The stability of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is good.

Palo Alto Networks Panorama is scalable.

We have approximately 250,000 users using this solution.

We have a technical support manager from Palo Alto Networks Panorama but their response time could be faster.

We previously used Cisco ASA and we switched to Palo Alto Networks Panorama because it is a superior solution.

The initial installation of Palo Alto Networks Panorama is straightforward and the process takes a couple of hours.

We used an integrator to do the implementation of Palo Alto Networks Panorama.

We have four to five engineers that support the solution.

There is a license required to use this solution and it is paid annually.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Palo Alto Networks Panorama an eight out of ten 

It is essentially a lightweight SIEM, so it'll detect and flag any sort of vulnerabilities or attacks on your network.

I've been using the most recent version of it. In terms of deployment, it is on the cloud. It is a private cloud. It is Palo Alto's Cloud, and I think they host on AWS.

It centralized the management of our Palo Alto systems. It provided more visibility into what was going on. It sort of gave a single painted glass picture instead of 25 different pictures.

Panorama enables you to provision all your firewalls and other things as a cluster. It is quite useful for that.

It is a very simple product. It does what it is designed to do.

Its UI and usability could be improved. The way the UI looks could be improved to make it a little bit more intuitive. Other than that, it is a pretty simple product.

I have been using this solution for four or five years.

It is 100% stable.

It is highly scalable. It is pretty much infinite.

In terms of the users, the Firewall Management team and the Security team use it. There are probably only 10 people who really have access to it. They also take care of its maintenance.

It is being used extensively at the moment. Its usage will just kind of naturally grow over time. As we deploy more devices, we'll put them into Panorama for management.

Palo Alto is very good at technical support. They're a 10 out of 10. They're very good.

We used FireMon in the past. It does a little bit more, but it is not as tightly integrated as the Palo Alto solution.

It was very straightforward and very simple. I helped them roll it out and watch them spin it up. I didn't do anything configuration-wise, but I think it took us 10 minutes. It was that fast.

It was done in-house.

Its licensing is yearly and multi-yearly. It is not expensive.

Be prepared for simple. It is not complicated. You're up and running in 10 minutes, so you'll be surprised.

It is only for Palo Alto products, so you can't scale it to anything else. It does what it is designed to do, which is to manage Palo Alto firewalls and other Palo Alto equipment.

I would rate it a 10 out of 10. It is a pretty simple platform; it is just the UI that can be made a little more intuitive. That's it.