F5 Distributed Cloud WAF (Web Application Firewall) vs. Media Temple IaaS Cloud

So a lot of companies that have a digital side and they have a lot of applications in the cloud, this is one of those areas that it can protect the net so it can lock 'em down, it'll build a baseline so you understand what that application's doing. So if it sees something not normal, it'll get protected against that.

Incentivized

I think Media Temple is well suited for a somewhat tech-savvy and sophisticated dev shop that wants something powerful to use but doesn't want the complexity of something like Rackspace or AWS. If you don't need an insane level of control and would have something more on a managed basis, Media Tempe IaaS is the way to go.

Incentivized

• Layer seven attacks are becoming far more common. Traditionally it was always layered three, layer four, where you get an additional firewall, but with the application layer attacks become more frequent, more popular, et cetera. So having the web application firewall protecting us, and then with the recent Log4j, that's the most recent use case when it gave us that instant level of protection whilst we remediated the Log4j that we had that and the F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was protecting us.
• I have a great relationship with the account manager, my account manager, and I think he drives the best price possible, um, for me, and I'm happy with that price.
• F5 Distributed Cloud WAF is always innovating and evolving.
• We run a very competitive proof value where we run numerous competitors against each other, and then we evaluate from that and then make the selection, and F5 Distributed Cloud WAF was the winner.

Incentivized

• Great user interface.
• Great performance.
• Creating a Wordpress website is very easy.

Incentivized

• So we just had some performance issues when it comes to routing. Because the web application firewall sits in front of our website, which is hosted on-site, we had some trouble with the VGP protocols between the two sites and it took us a while to figure it out. So that is probably one area where we could improve. Otherwise, when it comes to the WAF functionality itself, it's really good.

Incentivized

• There are often errors with automatic updates and management of 3rd party tools including software such as Plesk.
• I think the communication options could be improved. It isn't as easy to set up alerts as you would want.
• Your plans are grandfathered so you are somewhat stuck with an old plan.

Incentivized

Basically, Cloudflare is a more economical solution at the level of DNS balancing, easy to use with a few simple clicks and that has gained an advantage in the market, however, compared to F5, it falls short of the entire protection panorama that the solution provides since F5 does not It's just DNS that goes further and that's where it differentiates and stands out.

Incentivized

We've been using both DreamHost and Media Temple for years and Media Temple has a better overall experience, offering a more robust solution in terms of scalability and customization. On the other hand, DreamHost has great support and a better pricing policy. So it depends on what are you looking for and your budget as well.

Incentivized

• Accelerated time to value as it was a requirement for a workload being provisioned on that cloud
• As an existing f5 customer, access to their solutions integrator (GridZero) made the sizing, licensing, purchases, and downloading of the software very quick and painless

Incentivized

• It is a huge part of our overall web offerings. We depend on Media Temple day-to-day for a large contingency of clients.
• Reduction in costs and increase in bandwidth.
• An easy learning curve for new staff and semi-technical employees.

Incentivized