This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

What does XG do better than the UTM?

Hi folks,

time to start a debate on XG (15 mr3) v UTM (9.404).

I have an XG, currently in hibernation because it has too many bugs which get worse with each update.

The UTM is harder to configure, but has more has more fine tuning ability. Has better debugging facilities, better logs.

The XG has some strange logic LAN to WAN to block IPS when logic says WAN to LAN.

XG has easier policy setting up than the UTM to get web proxy working, but doesn't have as many options as the UTM. Still need a MASQ rule for the web proxy.

Mail scanning well in my opinion that is just a disaster, so many spam messages, each attachment is reported as spam. No blocking of POP3/IMAP (S) messages.

Country blocking on the XG will work one day. No relay.

Policies not used, but no error messages.

Strange menus.

Your thoughts.



This thread was automatically locked due to age.
Parents
  • Hey Ian

    We're about to release the XGv16 BETA.  Although MR3 fixed many issues, the v16 release will fix more underlying issues, but it will also do a couple of other major things; decrease the feature gaps between the UTM and XG and also help increase usability and visibility.

    From a feature gap perspective, A full MTA is back in action (as an option for those that have gotten use to a transparent gateway), OTP is back, easier to use Web Filtering policies and there's a now a 'Live Log' window which is similar to that of the UTM.

    There's buckets more to the release and things are still being refined, which is what the BETA will ask for.

    If you're keen on getting access to it sooner rather than in the next few weeks, please PM me and I can arrange for details to be sent.

    Cheers

    Azz

Reply Children
No Data