Re: Firewall reccommendation
From: Leythos (void_at_nowhere.lan)
Date: 02/24/05
- Next message: kamalarora10_at_yahoo.com: "Re: PIX and DMZ"
- Previous message: Joe: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- In reply to: Joe: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Next in thread: T. Sean Weintz: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Reply: T. Sean Weintz: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2005 22:02:30 GMT
On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 13:05:53 -0800, Joe wrote:
> Leythos wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Feb 2005 06:31:50 -0800, Dwight wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I called sonicquard and the 170 is what makes the most sense. It comes
>>>10,25, unlimited and it is upgradeable from level to the next.
>>>
>>>I see watchguard has a similar box in the firebox x15, but it looks
>>>like the sonics are easier to configure.
>>
>>
>> I've used both and would always pick a WG over anything Sonic makes, same
>> for Netscreen. At the same time, a PIX would always be my last choice.
>>
>
> Why? Sonic is cheaper and does everything well, everything I'd want.
> plus the watchguard doesn't do some things that the sonicwalls do. i
> don't think so. but i forget. they cost way more money tho.
I've had issues when Sonic and their support staff. There is nothing I've
seen of the Sonic units that WatchGuard doesn't offer, and while the may
cost more, cost is relative to function and performance vs how much you're
willing to pay for those two.
-- spam999free@rrohio.com remove 999 in order to email me
- Next message: kamalarora10_at_yahoo.com: "Re: PIX and DMZ"
- Previous message: Joe: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- In reply to: Joe: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Next in thread: T. Sean Weintz: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Reply: T. Sean Weintz: "Re: Firewall reccommendation"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Relevant Pages
|