SonicWall TZ Reviews

We use SonicWall TZ for firewall and security services.

I like the firewall product, the security server, and the content filter.

The price could be better for us in Bolivia.

SonicWall TZ is very stable.

SonicWall TZ is scalable. 

Technical support is very good. 

The initial setup is very easy. Enterprises just need one person to maintain this solution. But for reseller support, we have two engineers and two specialists to help the engineers.

The price could be better for us in Bolivia. 

I will tell potential users that I think it's a great product. With the new version, you also have more facilities and more features to protect your infrastructure. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonicWall TZ a ten.

We use only the latest version. 

We use the solution for CFS, app control and in respect of integrated IAD users. 

The solution boasts good performance and is easy to use. 

The solution should provide some additional ports. Currently, we have only four to five of these.

We have been using SonicWall TZ for around five to six years.

The solution is stable. 

The solution is scalable. 

Tech support is knowledgeable when it comes to clarifying a technical issue. 

Installation takes a maximum of 30 minutes. There is a default template. 

One only need register the firewall, upgrade the latest firmware and select that template. It will automatically configure the template.

We have two teams that are responsible for the deployment and maintenance.

We have around 20 clients making use of the solution. 

We purchase the firewalls, distribute and implement them for our clients. We are implementers. 

I would definitely recommend the solution to others.

I rate SonicWall TZ as a ten out of ten. 

We use SonicWall TZ as our perimeter gateway, similar to an internet gateway.

I would like to see more integration with other platforms.

The flexibility can also be improved and it could be more user-friendly.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for a couple of years.

SonicWall TZ is a stable product.

It is a scalable product. We have more than 40 people in our organization who are using this solution.

Technical support is good. We have no issues with the technical support.

The initial setup was straightforward. It was easy to install SonicWall TZ.

The time it takes to deploy is based on the clients requirement.

We have one or two technical engineers to maintain this solution. Developers are not required.

We completed the installation ourselves. We did contact an integrator or vendor team, we are consultants.

Customers are required to pay for a yearly subscription.

I would recommend this solution to others who are interested in using it.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a ten out of ten.

We use SonicWall directly with on-premise site filtering and BPM. Now we're using monitoring tools from SonicWall to get control of the clientside and help them remotely. That's most of the cases we are using.

We like their interface very much. It's pretty easy to use. 

There is a point I don't like about SonicWall in the past and now. Most of the destinations we look at when we're detecting some user using too much bandwidth or something like that, SonicWall just gave us the destination IP address instead of the full qualified domain name. I think that's the most important part that is still missing. I think that's the most important thing for us.

The fully qualified domain name is very good flexible information. We can detect issues on each page, so we don't have to wonder a lot about other tools. It would also help if there was a simple way to log in the users, which is one login from Windows Active Directory, without having to deploy patch information or using external tools like SSO. 

I have been using SonicWall TZ for about ten years now.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give SonicWall TZ a nine.

We use the solution for internet access, content filtering, point-to-point tunnels, and bandwidth management.

The most valuable features have been content filtering, and the interface is easy to navigate and to use.

The log sections could be done more clearly.

I would like there to be the ability to manage content filtering on a per-user basis or by using the application as we normally would for all users. Currently, it is applied to a group of users and I do not think it is reliable or performing as good as it should.

I have been using this solution for approximately 12 years.

I have found this solution reliable and stable.

The solution is scalable. Our client's user usage sizes vary. We have clients with five to 200 users using the solution. The number of connections is not limited and there is always room for expansion.

The technical support is excellent.

We previously used Microsoft before SonicWall. We switched because this solution has more features, such as embedded content filtering.

The initial setup is easy.

If you are not using a vendor or implementation team it can take a maximum of three hours for a medium-size company of 50 users.

The price is fair for the solution for the quality you receive.

I would recommend this solution because it is easy to use and the configuration is simple.

I rate SonicWall TZ an eight out of ten.

We have multiple branches, and we have configured SonicWall VPNs for branch-to-branch connectivity through IPSec. I am also restricting websites to protect us from hackers, torrents, games, and other such things. I am using SonicWall TZ 400 series.

Most of the features are useful. It is easy to configure and easy to troubleshoot.

I can see the utilization of different networks, and there are also App control features. 

FortiGate has a client DNS in the firewall, but SonicWall doesn't have that. To create or configure a site-to-site VPN tunnel, we have to give a DNS name. Currently, we have to get the DNS name from a third party and then include it in SonicWall, whereas FortiGate has its own client DNS, so it provides a DNS name, and it does not require a third party.

There should be a graphical option to view the network utilization and bandwidth usage.

I have been using this solution for two years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. We have 100 users of this solution. We might increase its usage in the future in about eight months.

Their technical support is good. They are very helpful. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

We were using ESET Antivirus for endpoint security. For firewalls, we were using FortiGate and MikroTik firewalls. FortiGate is fine, and it is helpful and easy, but MikroTik is not. It can't stop attacks from hackers.

In addition to SonicWall TZ, we are now using Cloud App Security from SonicWall for endpoint security, and we have Email Security from SonicWall for emails. In addition, we are using Capture Client from SonicWall for endpoint protection. All these solutions are very helpful, easy to configure, and easy to troubleshoot.

It was straightforward. It took five to ten minutes.

I would recommend this solution. We plan to keep using this solution. We have recently renewed our license, and we don't have any plans to use any other solution.

I would rate SonicWall TZ an eight out of ten.

Our clients use it for VPN, firewall, antivirus, and content filtering purposes. We have its latest version.

Content filtering and application rules are the most valuable features. It is also easy to configure.

Its pricing can be better. It is very expensive.

I have been using this solution for around ten years.

It is very stable.

It is scalable. I didn't have any issues with scalability. Our clients are small organizations with 20 to 40 users.

Their technical support is very good. I also like its documentation, which is easy to access.

Our clients have been using different solutions, such as pfSense, and they migrate to SonicWall TZ because it has more security.

Its initial setup is simple. The duration depends on the number of users and configuration, but it usually takes around 12 hours. We have three or four people for its deployment.

Its price is very high, which makes it difficult to convince the clients to buy this solution.

I would recommend this solution for implementing security. I am satisfied with this solution. It meets our expectations.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a nine out of ten.

The primary use case is to protect all of the internal users from cyber attacks.

The most valuable feature is the user-friendly navigation.

As compared to other firewalls, they should provide an unlimited number of users for the SSL VPN.

The VPN that is available in the new version is a bit bulky and slower in speed. It should also be easier to use.

The SD-WAN feature should be enhanced, similar to Fortinet FortiGate.

I have been working with this solution for six months.

We have just upgraded TZ to 350.

We are not able to use the VPN. It has limitations. It comes with a certain number of users and we have to spend a lot for VPN accessibility.

The technical support is not very good. There is a facility called Geofencing where you can block IP addresses or certain countries.

When contacting their technical support, the technical support said that such a facility is not available in this firewall.

Another issue we had with technical support was when we wanted all of our VPN users to be migrated from our old firewall to this firewall, but somehow, technically they failed to do it. We had to configure it manually.

The technical competency of technical support is a bit on the lower side.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We have two engineers to maintain and deploy this solution.

The price is fair.

If it is used for internal users, it is very good as a firewall. But if it has to be used for VPN, it will be a bit costly and the VPN may be bulky. 

Using the VPN is not recommended, but as a firewall for blocking threats, it's good.

I would rate SonicWall TZ a seven out of ten.