Hardware Limitations In Home version

The limit has been "removed" since v18 EAP 1, but I believe It's temporary. It should go back soon. Maybe when the new MR-1 gets released.

I've been running my secondary XG on a VM with 16vCore without any issue lately.

This picture has taken while I had some files transfer between VM's.

Thanks!

Thanks for trolling.  If people like you are representing the company then I have no desire to be part of this community. Have a nice day troll

Hi Prism,

I think that is an anomaly in the VM version. I know when I first install v18 I get the full memory being available until I restart the XG, then the limitations are applied.

Ian

Flyncalpoly said:

Thanks for trolling.  If people like you are representing the company then I have no desire to be part of this community. Have a nice day troll

I'm sorry, but, What the fsck? Seriously?

I can't believe I'm wasting my time writing this. This really looks like a weak troll post from you.

In the beginning of the thread you said;

Flyncalpoly said:

there is no reason to limit hardware if it is proven that the UTM is in a home location.

How in the world will you prove to Sophos that  your currently only running XG on a Home environment? Do you really think they will put a lot of people and money just to inspect all Home users 24/7/365 to know if their running the Home version within their homes, instead of a small office? Just so the home users can have no hardware limit.

You should be grateful there even is a home license from the beginning.

No other else NGFW vendor in the market does this.

Flyncalpoly said:

There are tons of other UTM packages out there that don't have hardware limitations.

And all of them doesn't even come close to what Sophos XG is currently capable off. Most of them are half baked solutions, and open source packages that have no interconnection between themselves.

Look at pfsense, you can't have an IPS such as Suricata or Snort inspecting decrypted content from Squid, just because both of them inspect traffic direct from the interface.

Flyncalpoly said:

The limitation could be removed with the annual plan of $50/yr for the home premium.

As stated by rfcat_vk, the old astaro had a home license for $50, but the administration cost has way too high to maintain, It's much simpler giving it out for free to the home users.

Flyncalpoly said:

What you see is fair is your opinion; what I see is fair as a power home user / home lab is different.

If you were a Home lab user, or a power users you would know exactly the performance you can get from XG. Even for today standards you can get 1Gbit/s of inspected traffic with XG fairly easy.

The only problem here are people running CPU's from 2010 and expecting to push 1Gbit on their old dual core celeron that even on 2010 standards has already too weak.

Flyncalpoly said:

The limitation isn't necessary, and pushes people away from the product, which it has done to me.

The limitation is necessary, so companies don't abuse it.

Flyncalpoly said:

It doesn't seem this product is in primetime for power users.

Complete the opposite, just give yourself a time and learn what XG is capable of.

Flyncalpoly said:

Would you use a faster computer if there were no hardware limitations?  If you had a 7th generation intel with 16gb of ram, a 3 year old computer, would you want hardware limitations on it? You don't see a problem; I do.  No argument in the world will change my mind that there shouldn't be hardware limitations built into the software..

Why do you even want a i5, i7 just wasting energy and being loud as fsck while a 2018 Celeron that barely uses 20W can do 1Gbit with SSL/TLS Decryption?

Flyncalpoly said:

Any who this seems pointless at this time; as the developers will not unlock the software package for users.  Therefore, I will continue to use PFSense rather than giving the Sophos developers a yearly subscription fee.  Good luck to others; maybe they will finally realize this is the right thing in V20.

https://www.enterpriseav.com/SFv-4C6.asp

The current price for a 4C6GB license, with the same features of the home version will cost you $7000 USD/Year, do you really want more as a home user?

Flyncalpoly said:

With the limitations I wouldn’t offer it as an option to home based clients.  With being unable to fully test the software to its full capacity no I wouldn’t spec out to my business clients.  Again it’s a choice the company makes.

One thing, Home Users here are the minority. And if you really wanted to offer XG for your clients, you could simply become a partner and get NFR licenses for demonstration.

rfcat_vk said:

I think that is an anomaly in the VM version. I know when I first install v18 I get eh full memory being available until I restart the XG, then the limitations are applied.

Good to know, interesting enough, that VM got rebooted multiple times, and the limit still didn't got applied.

Thanks!

“you could simply become a partner and get NFR licenses for demonstration.“

Thank you had I known this I would have gone this route in the beginning.

If and when I can get Vodafone Gigafast etc.  I'm mulling a £500 budget for a device, I spent £300 on a UDM-Pro before selling it a month later.  They're now going for crazy money for what is such a flawed edge device.

Tempted to sell the Pondesk unit I bought and get the i3 back into service.  The SFF PC with 4 port Intel NIC is just sat in the spares pile at the moment.  Not sure the total power consumption of the unit.

This is a comparison between the two units I have atm re CPU - http://cpuspecs.com/E3845-vs-i3-6100T

Look at a Dell OptiPlex 3070 with i3-9100 - that's currently less than £500 with more than enough SSD storage, 8GB RAM.

Install a PCIe network card, and you'll have the ultimate machine, that's reasonable on power, and also enough throughput.

Shame the SFF offering from Dell doesn't have the ability to install a SFF PCI-E NIC.

The Intel I3-9100T has a lower TDP rating too.  Will look into options further etc.

I thought the SFF does - or do you mean the Micro - as I presume the later and yes would be nice if that had a PCI-e slot on it - would be perfect...