SonicWall TZ Reviews

This firewall makes up part of our security solution.

The most valuable features are security and technical support.

The pricing is of this solution is high and could be reduced to make it more competitive.

The monitoring is a little bit confusing.

I have been using SonicWall TZ for three years.

We have had no problems with stability.

This is a nice product in terms of scalability.

The technical support is good. If I call on the helpline then a technical person will assist us.

The initial setup is very easy. If a person knows some networking and about access levels then they will be able to configure it.

The price is high compared to some other solutions.

My license is about to expire and I am currently searching for a new solution. As we expand and open new offices, I am looking to change the whole setup.

In summary, this is a very good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I find the security we are able to do with the policies to be valuable. The monitoring is valuable as well.

Full monitoring obviously needs to be improved. We need full monitoring covered under the security licensing. The license should include reporting and monitoring. It shouldn't be an add-on, it should just go along with it. They should also make the monitoring easy to manage. Sometimes we need reports. We need some live monitoring decisions on how it's going down. We should take the live report from the SonicWall itself. I want to display the report under our monitor so I can monitor firewalls outside our area.

It's very stable and working fine.

The solution is very scalable. We don't plan to increase the usage right now. We have sufficient coverage. We don't plan future deployment.

I've had a good experience with technical support.

We haven't been using a different solution previously. We were using some antivirus software and some firewall software. We decided to implement SonicWall because it has good support and a good reputation in our area.

Initially, the setup is not so straightforward but we managed to make it work. Deployment was not so fast. It has initially taken two days, then after that, an hour or so. You only need one person for deployment.

Initially, we could only implement with the support from the reseller but then afterwards we handled it by ourselves.

I've seen great ROI since implementing it.

We considered many products, and afterwards, we found SonicWall to be the best solution.

We're using a variety of different models. The solution is very simple and works great and is working fine in the regions that are here.

I would rate the solution a nine out of 10. If it had better reporting functionality, I would give it a 10.

The primary use is for protecting the internet for client-to-search sites. We also use site-to-site VPN, and it segregates the traffic.

We are an integrator and a solution provider. We implement this and other solutions for our customers.

The most valuable features are the UTM, site-to-site VPN, and client-to-site VPN. The site-to-site VPN allows us to connect between the branches. We also use the global VPN client and the local VPN client.

I find most of the features are useful.

In some places, we face problems, especially in the client VPN portion. There are certain places where we are not able to contact. We don't have the lease line, static IP addresses, or dynamic IP addresses. This is an area of concern.

Another thing which I don't like about SonicWall is that it tries to bypass the resellers. That is not good. SonicWall suddenly calls the client, goes to them directly. That is not a good thing.

They should consider working a bit more on their ransomware application.

The solution, once it's configured properly, is unbreakable. The only thing is that on the dynamic DNS we are facing some problems. Fortinet is doing much better, compared to SonicWall because they have their own data center and the dynamic DNS is working better. It provides a much better and more stable VPN. This is dependent upon third-party servers. If their server is down then we're finished. We depend upon them, and we have to wait for some time. This is a big problem.

Scalability-wise, with most of the mid-range solutions, there is no scalability. If you want to upgrade, you have to upgrade it. One good thing about SonicWall is the modular nature of the product. That means you can buy whatever part of the solution you want. That is one beauty of it. If you don't want IPS, you don't have to buy the IPS. That option, that's much better than anybody else.

I would rate technical support a seven out of ten.

We did use a previous solution, but the client wanted to switch. 

The initial setup was complex. It is not so straight forward. It's not tough like others, but still, they can improve on it.

Deployment takes, depending upon the concentration, anywhere from half a day to two days, depending upon the password you need to deal with for all the configuration. If everything is not the same, like you have UTM features and all those things, it may go up to one day, depending upon the configuration. If the training is also added into it, two, three days including training and assistance.

We are a reseller. I've been doing this for three years. I set up most of the firewalls, and we work with the company and also we have direct end users. We work as a consultant for other IT companies.

For deployment, in terms of staff, the maximum you need, depending on the project, would be two to three people. Sometimes it will be enough even to use one or two people. A lot of that depends on requirements. 

License renewals come in around $35,000 to $45,000. That's the retail price.

When it comes to marketing this type of solution to customers, we try to focus more on the Fortinet side. However, if they are already invested in a solution like SonicWall then we continue with the same thing.

If the client is using SonicWall, we use SonicWall as well, for reliability. If they're using Fortinet, we try to use the same thing and try to minimize the cost, that's how we work.

In terms of advice, I would say that you have to look at the entire solution. There are certain things which SonicWall cannot do. SonicWall doesn't support ADSL because of security reasons but sometimes you need it, you want a little bit, you need to have that option to be working. Unfortunately, that option is not there, but sometimes you need it. Therefore, you have to evaluate the requirement.

Also, sometimes the quality is not so good. We have trouble sometimes with SonicWall. Unfortunately, sometimes the normal way of getting into the remote connectivity doesn't work because it's on a data correction. Or we only need to get into another specific connection. SonicWall doesn't support this connection. If we can't access the VPN we can't establish a check with the VPN. There was an incident like that and we had to take another break and then finish the product. You have to evaluate all this and then implement it. It's not possible to just not do something because SonicWall cannot. If it's for security you have to do it, there is no other option.

I would rate this solution between a six and seven out of ten. More work can be done on the servers, and the VPN areas also. It's a little bit confusing on the route side. I think the routes need to be cleaner, better. 

Most of the features are valuable. They give good protection to my network and support it. It has a good facility with side to side VPN and everything. I use it in all my offices.

I currently have two issues from SonicWall. One issue is that the IP is not the public IP. Sometimes it moves to an alternate source and I have to refresh the new IP then we can proceed.

The solution is stable. I like it. The TZ600 is good. I've had no issues or problems. We have about 100 users at the moment.

It's scalable.

Technical support is not good. If we send complaints to the SonicWall support they don't provide good support for us. You can't call them by phone.

It's easy to install. I don't remember exactly how long the deployment took.

My advice would be if you're buying this product, you will have to look up the security design. There are not a lot of firewalls up on the market, but I've found SonicWall to be reliant.

I would rate this solution 9 out of 10. It's good.

We use it for a variety of businesses and schools.

Its ease of installation has improved my organization. That's what I do most. I install the firewalls.

I don't have anything that I would say needs improving at the moment. The small business line has less PPS throughput and that's what you're going to lose on when you use WatchGuard. So they need to improve the throughput of the firewall in the small business line.

Easy to explain : 

                                 WatchGuard T70 vs SonicWall TZ600 
Firewall Throughput :       4Gbps          vs      1.9Gbps
Price :                             610€            vs       973€

I've only ever had one problem. I have a bank that has two NSAs in high availability. The only time I had a problem was with the high availability from the update. That's the only time. And that was last month. I did an update. I disabled the high availability and we reset it, the firewall, and installed the config again. And updated it one by one.

I have no negative impression of the scalability.

I haven't tried technical support yet, so I haven't needed support yet on anything.

Moved to new Employer.

The initial setup is straightforward. I deploy at least one solution a month, to different sites. You only need one person for deployment.

I did the implementation myself.

The pricing is where you might lose to WatchGuard now. I'm looking into moving some parts over to WatchGuard because they are on the small business side. But if you compare the TZ300 and 400 series against WatchGuard series, they are the same, but there is a price difference between them.

I wasn't a part of any decision making in terms of options. 

We use a variety of models, from the TZ300, up to the NSA 2600. For businesses, I recommend TZ400.

I would rate the solution 8 out of 10. I would rate WatchGuard itself 10, because I really like that product, and the ease of use. And when I say ease of use, I mean I know that product in and out. And it's very easy to set up external sites with the system management tool that comes free with WatchGuard.

SonicWall TZ is a UTM. We use it for unified threat management. It helps us a lot, although the software needs to be installed on a better machine to do the analysis.

The log analyzer in SonicWall TZ is something that they need to improve upon. With other firewalls, they have built-in storage. We also need to retain the logs for analysis.

With SonicWall TZ, these features are less when we compare it to other solutions.

The features that we have found most valuable in SonicWall TZ are the intrusion and brute force attack prevention.

This product has room for improvement in the cloud version. Also, the support could be better. Otherwise, SonicWall TZ is good for us.

The additional feature I would like to see included in the next release of SonicWall is a better analyzer. That would be more helpful. Then people will stay with SonicWall.

We like the product. SonicWall TZ is stable and serving the purpose required.

The scalability of SonicWall TZ is good. It's easy-to-use and straightforward. One or two admins should be sufficient for user management.

The SonicWall TZ support is okay overall but could be improved in many ways.

We were using Cisco previously.

The initial setup was straightforward. Deployment here is quite simple. We were using Cisco products previously.

SonicWall TZ firewalls are very easy to use. It's a next-generation firewall. Compare products in terms of the features. With SonicWall TZ, we get more value for the money.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this solution an eight. The analysis meter and other important features are still missing.

We use the solution as a next-generation firewall, protecting our websites, our studio, protecting our network from attacks and also content filtering for our youth, our users on the network, and also a gateway anti-virus.

The technical support for the end user was reduced because the wipe action was already controlled. Also, the gateway antivirus prevented any virus from getting onto PCs or laptops. The administration of our network is very efficient.

I've found content censoring to be the most useful.

There can be an improvement in analysis and reporting. We need enhancement on the reporting side.

The stability is very nice. We have around fifty people using the solution.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We used administrative documents from the website of SonicWall. There was no need for anything else. Deployment took one or two hours, but we had a planning session first. Without that, implementation would take a long time.

Licensing costs have been around $2,000. There are no other costs above the standard licensing fees.

I would recommend this solution, it's a good solution. I would rate it 8 out of 10.

We use SonicWall TZ to write rules for our network firewall. You can use the matrix. It's easy to use.

We like the graphic user interface on SonicWall TZ. We use matrix principles to improve our organization.

The feature we found most valuable in SonicWall TZ is that it is user-friendly for an administrator.

We would like to improve the rules configuration in SonicWall TZ. Sometimes the rules don't work. We cannot prove that the rules don't work. Maybe they can improve that. 

Sometimes you write a rule in SonicWall and users are not able to use YouTube, Facebook, or Instagram. Users can see YouTube or Instagram for a while, but five minutes later, they cannot visit the sites.

The additional feature I would like to see included in the next release of this solution are analyzers. They can put it in the software, i.e which users are in which sites.

We need to see which users are on which sites simultaneously. In this edition, it's hard to see. You can just see the IP address. FortiGate has 40 analyzers. Maybe SonicWall can put it in the license for at least three.

We have shifted to SonicWall on our customers' sites and sometimes they're not reliable or stable. I don't see SonicWall TZ as stable. It happened after the Dell company bought SonicWall. I see this stability problem rarely, not often.

SonicWall TZ is scalable. The scalability is very good.

We don't need any technical support. We don't have any tickets. We don't have any calls. Customer support is not a problem.

The initial setup is not complex. It's easy. It's about the scale of the company. If we have just 15 employees, the setup takes almost one hour. If the company has 100 employees, it is three hours.

It's the user management that the company wants. They just want to let people go to the internet. If there are no rules or no constraints, it does not take time. It's easy to deploy.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate this product a nine. You can always improve some things.

Our primary use for SonicWall TZ is for a network firewall and for threat protection.

With SonicWall TZ, they should make the interface useful for the user. This needs to happen very soon because now the interface is not sufficient. 

When I need to apply some features, I get many tasks and too many to create objects.

SonicWall TZ is stable.

Our IT administrator is just one person, me.

I don't get the support that I need from SonicWall.

I didn't use any other solutions previously.

From one to ten, I would rate SonicWall TZ a seven for the end user experience. Other products have unlimited end users, but in SonicWall TZ there are just two admin users.

Our primary use case for this product is for remote access to smart-building solutions that we implement.

I have found this solution to be easier to use when compared to other products, such as those offered by Cisco.

The most valuable feature of this solution is that it is easy to install and maintain.

The support for this product has to be improved.

With what I use, I don't really require any other features.

We have not had any issues with the stability of this product. We have additional sites, aside from the smart-building, and we haven't encountered any hardware failure.

In terms of scalability, it is scalable to a certain extent. The downside is that one of the models has fiber-optic connections, but the other platforms do not support it.

While the product is fine, I find that there is no support. We purchased a license renewal and have not been able to apply it, even though I have raised this relatively simple issue with them. The lack of support is having me look into other solutions to replace SonicWall.

The setup is very easy compared to other platforms, where with Cisco or Huawei you have to move from one application to another. I did not have the training, but for me, it was really easy to use. The implementation took a few hours. 

While every site is different, based on what I have implemented it takes just a single engineer to deploy and maintain this solution.

The product pricing is relatively good, compared to other products, including the licenses. However, if you do not get support then the cost of the outlay is not really relevant.

We use other platforms including those offered by Cisco and Huawei. I had been looking into small firewall solutions that are capable of handling fiber-optic connections, rather than just Copper. I didn't want to pay for the premium platform just to use fiber-optic connections. However, the capability is not there on smaller platforms, including this one.

We chose this solution because it is easier to use than others.

Currently, SonicWall is our primary solution. To me, it can no longer be the primary because if I need support then I may not get it. With other products, it is quite simple.

For any new projects that I'll be working on, I will not be using SonicWall. This is simply a business decision that is based on my experience. I am responsible for the design, implementation, maintenance, and moving forward with the customer. If I am not happy then I cannot implement the solution because it will not help me in the future.

To be honest, when it comes to integration I would rate this product a nine out of ten. But, because of the lack of support, overall, I can only rate it one out of ten.