We performed a comparison between Meraki MX and Untangle NG Firewall based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Unified Threat Management (UTM) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."FortiGate firewalls are user-friendly, and I like the security profiling features."
"It works very well. It has a lot of different functionalities. Its cost is also fine for our customers."
"Security, SD-WAN, and Streetscape are valuable features."
"Whenever I need something, Fortinet improves and updates the software for me."
"Reliability is the best feature. We faced some issues when we were setting it up, but the service, portal, and administration are good."
"The pricing is excellent. It's much less expensive than Cisco."
"Mainly the FortiGate reporting system is very good. It guides us through all the expectations of security. Fortinet provides us all that we need for security. Also, Fortinet FortiGate is a next-generation firewall. It is much more advanced than others."
"We use the filtering feature the most. It has filtering and inbuilt securities. We can create customized rules to define which users can access a particular type of site. We can create policies inside the firewall."
"It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage."
"Since it has an integrated dashboard for all the products, customers can get complete network analytics regarding what the user is doing, monitoring, and observing."
"Easy to deploy with a simple configuration."
"I use Meraki in my POCs and with my customers as well."
"I love the simplicity of Meraki MX — specifically, the simplicity of the dashboard."
"It has the most advanced security features, for example, layer 3 and layer 7 firewall capabilities and the end team and IPS protection. It also has IPS, and it has very good functioning of cloning services. You don't actually have to touch the device. If you have multiple companies in different countries, you don't really require this device to be touched. You can get it delivered directly to any office of a country, and then you can simply put your configuration over the cloud. It's very simplified and easy to manage. It gives a very good granular visibility about your network. Earlier, a lot of things were lacking in the network. We were unable to identify where the problem was, but after implementing Meraki MX, we are able to dig down and identify where is the problem. We can easily and quickly identify the sources and the root causes of the issues."
"Both the scalability and the scalability are great with Meraki MX."
"MX is easy to manage, configure and install."
"They have a command center that makes it easy to log into and see all of your appliances nationwide."
"The web blocking for my clients and the application control are valuable."
"The product’s most valuable features are endpoint protection management, load balancing, and connectivity with Active Directory."
"Application Control and filtering features are valuable."
"Web filtering is very reliable."
"The Untangle firewall is a software firewall, so it runs on generic hardware. We found that was probably the best feature, and it's why we chose it when we started using it three years ago."
"The most valuable features are IPS, MAPI, NAT, and VPN."
"The majority of our clients are very small businesses, and Untangle devices have been fantastic for these small clients. We've basically standardized our stack to just simply use Untangle. We include the hardware and the service option, which makes it very easy and affordable for us to just simply push that into the monthly per-user costing that we provide as a managed services provider. It's really a no-brainer. They're easy to use, and they're easy to set up and configure. Support is generally good about resolving any issues that we have. We haven't had any real complaints."
"One of the problems I was having was with user mapping, and it is an issue for which I have escalated tickets with Fortinet support."
"It needs to improve its ISP load balancing."
"Technical support is good but the response time could be faster."
"Technical support could be better. You don't always get the level of help you need right away."
"They need faster serviceability and more security features."
"Scalability for Fortinet FortiGate needs to be improved. SD-WAN security for this solution also needs some improvement."
"The support costs and licensing are sometimes so expensive."
"Technical support needs to be improved."
"When we do API integrations with Meraki, they have always been hard as well as tedious to build. The data that we want out of the API integrations has been only recently available. Six months ago, it was hard to get someone to build something correctly or useful with Meraki APIs. Recently, they have made more data available on the API, but it is just a start. They need to do more."
"Meraki has some hidden features and information that is only privy to their engineers. If that information became available to us, then it would improve our ease of management, and we would be able to make certain adjustments instead of having to go to them."
"As far as what needs to be improved — nothing really comes to mind. It does what we need it to do."
"When it comes to cost, that's a pain point."
"MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients."
"The whole Cisco Meraki range requires easier access for cameras. For a security center, it would be helpful to have easier access to cameras through the portal. Its licensing cost could also be better."
"FortiGate is cheaper than Meraki. Even the license renewal is less than Meraki."
"Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool."
"The common center facility that Untangle provides should be available on-premises. There are great corporations here in Mexico that like the Untangle solution, but they don't like the fact that the monitoring and access to the appliance are in the cloud. They request for the common center facility to be available and installed on-premises."
"On their low-end appliance, they could have more memory and the largest storage space. The low-end appliance comes with a too-small hard drive, and it could use a little extra room. It only comes with about 4 gigs or 8 gigs of memory, and the hardware space is only 40 gigs, which is really small."
"The pricing should be reduced because it is expensive."
"The product needs to improve its mobile application."
"The ability to setup a DDNS for each WAN independently would be a very handy feature."
"The pricing is not as good as it was some time ago. They've since skipped offering a lot of individual features."
"Web-filtering policies could be improved."
"The hardware can be improved."
Meraki MX is ranked 2nd in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 59 reviews while Untangle NG Firewall is ranked 6th in Unified Threat Management (UTM) with 22 reviews. Meraki MX is rated 8.2, while Untangle NG Firewall is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MX writes "Cost-effective, simplified, easy to manage, and reliable with advanced security features and granular visibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Untangle NG Firewall writes "Its simplicity, variety of features, and low pricing have enabled us to improve the security for our small business clients at a price that they are happy to pay for". Meraki MX is most compared with Palo Alto Networks NG Firewalls, Cisco Secure Firewall, Sophos XG, SonicWall TZ and Netgate pfSense, whereas Untangle NG Firewall is most compared with OPNsense, Netgate pfSense, Sophos XG, Sophos UTM and IPFire. See our Meraki MX vs. Untangle NG Firewall report.
See our list of best Unified Threat Management (UTM) vendors and best Firewalls vendors.
We monitor all Unified Threat Management (UTM) reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.