Cisco Meraki MX Reviews

I utilize their whole stack. I use their Cisco Meraki MX firewalls, MS switches, MV cameras, and MR Wi-Fi.

I can tell you about my use cases for Cisco Meraki MX, as I use it as high availability in my use case at my clinics. I have the firewalls in an HA in the network. I do some client VPN tunneling and I have a direct fiber connect. An SFP+ connects to connections to my switches. The firewall is phenomenal. It allows the normal day-to-day IT to be able to troubleshoot issues on the fly without having to know major CLI commands. It's very intuitive, very easy on the eyes, and easy to navigate through. I deploy this at all of my clinics in an HA, and it works great. Failover is quick, and it's quick to respond. Firmware upgrades are easy to deploy remotely.

The criteria and policies that govern how my Cisco Meraki MX appliances dynamically steer traffic across multiple uplinks are by the application that I'm utilizing. My core application is a contact center, so my voice application is going to take precedence. I'm applying a QoS policy or some type of policy that puts that first. That's what governs what I hear and what I do.

Cisco Meraki takes the complexity out of network configuration. I no longer need a dedicated architect to do this anymore. Cisco Meraki and others are starting to see that. Once you start taking the complexity out, they still give you the ability to get into the CLI and run minimal things. I feel the CLI is the old way. They're making it easier and easier, and that's how it should be. It shouldn't be so complicated.

If there was anything I can say I don't about it, I wish the automation was a little bit more friendly. If someone doesn't know too much about automations, I wish it had the ability within the platform to say, 'I want to run this automation within this network. Here's the new network that's coming on board. I'm utilizing the same firewalls, the same switches, same MVs. Here's the subnet that I'm going to use. Here are the IPs for the devices.' It should be able to give me that run book and configure it. That would be my main thing within the automation.

I don't have much else to complain about. Everything is pretty straightforward. Back in the day, about five years ago, I tried to run 10 terabytes of data on an MX95 with a gig fiber coming in. The firewall was doing all the routing at the time and all the Layer 3. I did see some degraded performance trying to push that data through my MS350 10 gig switch. Once I moved the Layer 3 off the firewall and placed it on my core switch, I saw a better improvement. However, that was five years ago, and I'm not pushing that type of data out now.

If the splash page was a little bit more appealing and more configurable, I think that would be nice.

I have been using Cisco Meraki MX for about 10 years now.

I haven't seen any lagging, crashing, downtime, or any sort of instability. I get an occasional reboot here and there, and then a firmware fix addresses that. That's usually on the secondary. I haven't had the issue of it going down or completely powering off unless it's ISP related.

They seem to function fine during ISP degradation or brownout events, as I don't have any issues with those. Especially with brownout events, I have my devices on a battery backup, but even when that goes down, I don't see too many issues with that.

Scalability is great. The WAN interfaces are 2.5 gigs. Once I enable threat protection and AMP protection, that scales that down. I wish they would work on that a little bit. The WAN has 2.5 gigs, then I have four gig, and I have four SFPs or two of those. It can definitely scale. It's definitely one of the better firewalls out there.

The quality and speed of the support is great. They have new processes where they prefer a case first compared to back in the day, but every time I got a hold of someone, I was always able to resolve my issues. I commend them because they're really good.

I give them a 10 on a scale from 1 to 10, with 10 being the highest, for the support.

I used to use ASAs and Firepower back in the day. I did a little Sophos back in the day. I would say Sophos is a little bit more comparable to Cisco Meraki MX.

The initial deployment for Cisco Meraki MX is really easy. It's one of the things I appreciate about Meraki. I'm able to show a regular network tech or just a regular tech how to navigate through it before the device has even arrived and is plugged in. I can already have the license imported and have the network configured. As soon as it arrives at the location and my ISP is configured, it's plug and play.

The younger generation that I'm training gives me feedback that this is really easy to navigate and they're able to understand some of the commands or some of the modules visually. Many people understand things or learn visually, while others can know more of the command lines. For people who can't remember commands, I have a hard time remembering them, but the help feature is really useful. Visually, I can see it and click it. I can't get any better than that.

Many of the firewalls are going that way and cloud managed. They're taking the complexity out of configuring it. That's key, and that's one of the things Cisco Meraki MX has a grasp on. They're taking the complexity out of the configuration. If this is your WAN IP and this is just a simple small-medium business that just needs a network with maybe one to two VLANs, I can just click here and it's so simple. It's super easy.

It does not require any maintenance on my end. I have seven clinics. They all have two MX95s in an HA. Tonight, I'm getting ready to do a firmware upgrade. At first, I would always go on site, even at previous jobs, just to see it go through the firmware upgrade. Now that I have a lot more confidence in the current firmwares, I'm now doing my upgrades remotely.

I haven't utilized their automation for managing multiple locations, any new workspaces, or any new workbooks for new locations because all of my locations are their own entity. They're their own clinic. When the clinic grows to, let's say, I have Cisco Meraki switches in a stack, and the switches are doing the Layer 3. They're never going to grow to three, four, five, six stacks. So there's really no need to have a run book or some type of flow that says, 'Here's a new stack. Here's the configuration auto-config from stack one.' I'm never going to do that. Each location is a new setup. I know I can probably automate that through Terraform and Ansible, but for me, it's easier once I place the order and I get my licensing. At that point, I have to add those licensing into the dashboard. At that point, Cisco Meraki MX is so simple that I can, within literally 5 to 10 minutes, configure the network and have it ready to go within the dashboard.

I would it. I wish they had a lot more classes on that type of automation or a lot more communication on the automation.

I think the pricing is comparable. The licensing or some of the add-on modules, I think are outrageous, especially for the CS versions. If I'm just talking about Cisco Meraki MX, the prices are pretty reasonable. The pricing for support actually speaks for itself because their support is phenomenal.

I have been working in my current field overall for 26 years.

I would go with the MS switches for review.

I would talk about Cisco Meraki MX as my focus.

Regarding the trade-offs I have observed between local breakout and centralized threat inspection, I haven't seen any or had any breaches or any threats alert me or come through at the firewall level. For me, it's more at the end-point level, but I know that Cisco Meraki MX has this new trust traffic exclusion through the security. I'm eager to start familiarizing myself with this type of trusted applications.

I give Cisco Meraki MX a 10 for the overall score.

Our main use case for Cisco Meraki MX is network security and centralized network management. We use it as a security gateway, firewall, and VPN access.

On a typical day, I use the Meraki dashboard to monitor network health and check for unusual traffic or connectivity issues. If a user reports that a website or application is not accessible, I can review the traffic logs and security events to determine whether the traffic is being blocked. I can then update required firewalls or security policies centrally and monitor the results without needing to be physically on-site.

Another useful aspect is centralized troubleshooting. When a remote user experiences connectivity issues, I can check the Meraki dashboard for device status, bandwidth usage, VPN connectivity, and security events. This helps us quickly identify whether the issue is related to the user's device, the network, or a security policy, and resolve it remotely without needing to access the firewall directly.

The features I rely on most are the centralized dashboard, VPN capabilities, and security and threat protection. The dashboard stands out because it gives me a clear, real-time view of network health, connected devices, traffic, and security events from one place. The VPN is useful for securely connecting remote users and sites, while the security features help monitor and block potentially harmful traffic. Overall, the biggest benefit is the ability to manage the network centrally without having to be physically on site.

Another feature I find helpful is the visibility and reporting provided through the dashboard. Being able to quickly review traffic patterns, security events, bandwidth usage, and device status makes troubleshooting much easier. I also appreciate the ease of making configuration changes centrally and having those changes applied across the network without needing to manage the firewall locally. Overall, simplicity and visibility are what make Cisco Meraki MX particularly useful for day-to-day network administration.

Cisco Meraki MX has had a positive impact by saving time, improving security, and making troubleshooting much easier. The centralized dashboard gives us a quick view of network performance and security events, allowing us to identify issues remotely. The built-in security and threat protection features help us enforce consistent security policies and respond to potential threats more efficiently. Overall, it has reduced the time spent on routine network administration and troubleshooting.

One of the main improvements has been a reduction in time required for troubleshooting and routine network administration. With the centralized Meraki dashboard, we can quickly identify connectivity issues, review traffic and security events, and make configuration changes remotely. This has reduced the need for on-site troubleshooting and helped us resolve common network issues more effectively. It has also improved visibility into network activity, making it easier to maintain consistent security policies.

One area that could be improved is providing more advanced reporting and analytics within the dashboard, especially more detailed historical data and customizable reports. It would also be useful to have greater flexibility for advanced firewall and security configuration without making the interface more complex. Better customization and more detailed troubleshooting information would also help administrators.

Another improvement would be more granular control over alerts and notifications, so administrators can prioritize critical security and network events without being overwhelmed by less important alerts. More detailed historical analysis and easier integration with third-party security and monitoring tools would also be valuable. Overall, I would keep the simplicity of the Meraki dashboard while adding more advanced options for administrators who need deeper control and visibility.

One additional improvement would be better support for integration with third-party security and monitoring platforms. More flexible APIs, deeper SIEM integration, and more detailed security analytics would make Cisco Meraki MX even more useful for organizations with a broader security stack, while the simplicity and centralized management are already strong points.

I have been using Cisco Meraki MX for about six months.

Cisco Meraki MX is pretty much stable in most cases.

Cisco Meraki MX is scalable. With the increase of the account, it can consider that and evaluate the situation. Network devices and everything can be managed centrally through the cloud dashboard. This makes it especially useful for distributed or multi-site environments.

Customer support has been good overall. If we had any kind of issues regarding the deployment of Cisco Meraki MX, the support team generally handled the situation quite well.

Before Cisco Meraki MX, we used a more traditional firewall that required more manual configuration and on-site access.

We have seen a positive return on investment, mostly through time savings and improved operational efficiency, rather than direct cost reductions. While we do not have a specific metric regarding it, we have seen a positive impact on our administrative tasks.

My experience with the pricing and licensing has been generally positive. While the upfront cost can be higher than other solutions, the initial setup cost for the simplicity, cloud-based management, and features justifies the price. The license model is straightforward. The main drawback is that recurring license costs need to be considered as part of the long-term operating budget.

Before choosing Cisco Meraki MX, we evaluated other firewalls and network security solutions, including Fortinet and traditional Cisco ASAs.

I would recommend Cisco Meraki MX to organizations looking for a simple, centralized network security and management solution. Before choosing it, I would evaluate the licensing cost, expected network growth, bandwidth requirements, and specific security features you need. The biggest advantages are the easy-to-use dashboard, centralized visibility, remote management, VPN capabilities, and straightforward troubleshooting. I would also recommend taking advantage of the trial or evaluation period.

Overall, it is a strong platform for network management. If you want to have a centralized view of your network and administrative tasks, then Cisco Meraki MX is a good device to use rather than a traditional firewall.

One of the main challenges with security policies that Cisco Meraki MX addresses is its centralized dashboard, which allows us to configure policies for all our sites, manage firewalls and VPN policies, and troubleshoot connectivity remotely from a single dashboard. This reduces the need for on-site investigation and makes it easier to maintain consistent security across the organization. I would rate this product an eight out of ten.

Cisco Meraki MX is used for SD-WAN. Organizations need URL filtering and web security content. Small and medium businesses need it because it is a bit cheaper than other products. Unified branches benefit because some models have multiple functions such as wireless, 4G connectivity, or 3G connectivity, plus some switching ports.

SD-WAN is built on Auto VPN connectivity. Auto VPN connectivity is one of the most requested features that customers ask about, and we can promote and market Cisco Meraki MX based on this function, aligned side by side with the cloud-managed feature.

The most powerful function of Cisco Meraki MX is the cloud-managed platform. You can manage all Meraki products, not only Cisco Meraki MX, through a single dashboard. This is the most important feature. The second valuable feature is flexible licensing. Basic licensing gives you a traditional firewall and a traditional router. It combines the firewall function plus routing functions. In the smaller models, even though they are small, they have a lot of functions including firewalling and routing. They have 3G, 4G connectivity, and wireless connectivity as well, plus they have ports for switches.

You do not need to sell a device for firewalling and ask for another monitoring platform plus another dashboard management. It is an all-in-one box. You can sell Cisco Meraki MX plus a license, and you get analytics and management from one dashboard on one side. This is one of the most useful features on Cisco Meraki MX because it is an all-in-one solution.

Advanced security is the second tier of Cisco Meraki MX. It brings you the main next-generation firewalling features such as URL filtering, advanced malware protection, and threat protection. This means you have a next-generation firewall that is not only a firewall. The geo-location feature on Cisco Meraki MX is very good in advanced security. Advanced security has a lot of other features, but these are the main ones. It also has flexible durations. It is not a three-year minimum requirement like Cisco Secure Firewall. You can go with one year, three years, five years, or even seven years; it is totally up to the client.

Cisco Meraki MX's content filtering has a wide range of capabilities, allowing you to filter based on the URL, group settings, and even block gambling and adult content. You can also prevent and block specific URLs, so it is simple in its configuration. That is the most important thing.

Cisco Meraki MX needs 5G connectivity on the smaller models. If there is an option to add wireless connectivity or at least 5G connectivity on all models, it would be better. The next-generation models have added and merged Cisco Secure Firewall and the new Cisco Secure Routers with Cisco Meraki MX. If they merged all lines with Cisco Meraki MX, I think it would be a very predictable and powerful platform. The most important thing is that customers need to manage Cisco Meraki MX from on-premises. If we can do that, it will not be Cisco Meraki MX at all. Cisco Meraki MX is special because it is cloud-managed. From my perspective, there is no need to improve on this side; you have to be a specialist in this area. You have to be on your way as a cloud-managed solution and do not go with customer opinions who need on-premises management.

I do not have anything in mind regarding additional features such as AI or ML because Cisco Meraki MX is targeting small and medium businesses. The functions that Cisco Meraki MX already has fit perfectly in this area of the market for small and medium businesses. However, the pricing is a bit high compared to other vendors such as Fortinet or Huawei. This is the main concern for customers.

I think this is the most important issue because if the price is a bit lower, Cisco Meraki MX will market and sell better than today.

I have been working with Cisco Meraki MX for five years.

The technical support from Cisco is fine. Cisco is one of the best vendors in the market. I would rate them between eight point five to nine out of ten.

Positive

I can compare Cisco Meraki MX with other vendors such as Fortinet, specifically FortiGate, and Huawei. If I were to compare the three vendors, I would say Cisco Meraki MX is the first one because it is easy to use and comparable. Fortinet is best because it is a security company, so its features are better. Huawei has a competitive price.

Overall, I would give Cisco Meraki MX a rating of eight out of ten.

My main uses for Cisco Meraki MX are selling to school districts, state and local government, large customers, and large commercial customers.

What I appreciate most about Cisco Meraki MX is its central management, which is easy to use. Their licenses offer flexibility with one year, five year, and seven year options that you can align with E-rate funding.

The end-to-end visibility from Cisco affects my organization's troubleshooting by making it effortless. It has AI built in so that it can pinpoint the problem without requiring external resources.

I faced some challenges with Cisco Meraki MX, but they fixed most of those issues. They had some firmware issues, but those are easily corrected from the cloud.

I have been using Cisco Meraki MX for 10 years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Meraki MX as outstanding. They stand behind their product completely. If something doesn't work, they send you another one.

I have had zero downtime at all with Cisco Meraki MX. The product is rock solid.

Cisco Meraki MX scales with the growing needs of my organization very well. It is easy to add licenses ad hoc at any point in time.

I evaluate customer service and technical support as a 10 out of 10. They are the best. TAC is unmatched.

Before selecting Cisco Meraki MX, I considered Juniper Mist.

My experience with deploying Cisco Meraki MX is that it is very easy due to its simplicity. You unbox it, connect it, and go.

I have experienced ROI with Cisco Meraki MX. Absolutely. You can eliminate some positions because it manages itself.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing is that pricing is challenging right now. However, cost for cost and pound for pound, it is the best dollar amount and the most value that you can find out there.

I assess the operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment as very high. I am Cisco certified and I have been with Cisco for a long time. I would say they are the best in the business.

My impression of the end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco is that it is unparalleled by any other technology out there. No one else can do it the way Cisco can.

The optimization with the hybrid experience is that it is a cloud-based technology. You have on-premises hardware that communicates with the central cloud, which manages all of the devices at one time.

As for Cisco as a whole, they are the best in the business. I rate this product a 10.

My main use for Cisco Meraki MX is for our retail locations. All our retail stores have connectivity back to our corporate.

What I like the most about Cisco Meraki MX is the ease of simplicity. It is easy to deploy, templatization, and security.

End-to-end visibility from Cisco helps a lot when I am troubleshooting and I have end-to-end visibility. I know exactly where the problem is. Cisco's Assurance and Cisco's Insight are really good.

I think Cisco Meraki MX can be improved by seeing more of Layer 7 firewall functions as opposed to just Layer 3. Having more applications that we can control while not hampering down the performance in the next release would be beneficial.

I have been using Cisco Meraki MX for four years now.

I would assess the stability and the reliability of Cisco Meraki MX as pretty stable. I would say it is rock solid for us.

On a scale of 1 to 10, I would evaluate customer service and technical support as 11.

Before Cisco Meraki MX, I considered other solutions, and this one was already inherited. When my previous organization was with another vendor, it was not Cisco Meraki MX but it was Viptela. We did a comparison of all the other SD-WAN solutions because that was our first SD-WAN deployment. We compared all options, including Silver Peak and VMware Cloud. Cisco Viptela came out on top.

The deployment process with Cisco Meraki MX was pretty easy.

I have seen returns on investments with Cisco Meraki MX. It greatly helps out when I am moving away from the expensive MPLS circuits or MPLS hardware. Provisioning is really easy.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing when I got it is that licensing cost with Cisco is always good. Pricing of Cisco Meraki MX hardware is pretty reasonable as compared to others. I am pretty happy with it.

I assess the operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment as really good. Cisco is really good across all uses. I have used Meraki, Catalyst Center, SD-WAN, Catalyst switches, and Wi-Fi. The ease is really good. Functionality-wise, Cisco always delivers on what they advertise.

I did face some challenges when I was doing the deployment, but not with Cisco Meraki MX. With Viptela, we did have a big challenge where the utilization numbers were initially slow. I am glad that Cisco caught it before we deployed, as the numbers were cutting it really slow. That was a big challenge as we had to re-architect because I selected one hardware A for looking for my throughput and then Cisco said I could not support that throughput, so I had to go for hardware B.

I give this review an overall rating of 10.

Cisco Meraki MX is mainly found in restaurants, restaurant cafes, and other restaurant-type environments. Because of the seamless integration at the back end with Cisco Meraki MX, you are almost certain that there are no hitches.

People have gotten used to it, and even clients will be asking me for specific models because they are well-versed with the product when discussing visibility.

This is very powerful because, as a brand, it is widely known, widely used, and widely accepted when discussing the advantages of the tool. The security aspect on Cisco Meraki MX is very nice, which is one of the specific features that I appreciate.

The predictability and app mode features of Cisco Meraki MX, especially in the use of restaurant Wi-Fi, stand out. The collaboration with other vendors such as Webex, Teams, Zoom, and even Google Meet is hinged onto Cisco. This is readily available and in use, as Cisco helps to address challenges in hybrid and distributed enterprise networks.

When you use the hybrid services with Cisco, the user experience is much more enhanced, and integration is seamless. Cisco Meraki MX is pretty easy to troubleshoot because visibility is super easy to detect, and the data, especially for endpoints and other things, is pretty easy to gather.

The reporting for third-party solutions with Cisco Meraki MX could be improved. There is a slight gap, so you may find some reporting on those devices not being catered for.

I find it very expensive when discussing the cost of Cisco Meraki MX. A lot of very good features in some of those other vendors such as Fortinet are quick to adapt to new technology, and their upgrades are much quicker and less expensive.

It is not very easy to achieve 100% return on the product because you need technical expertise in installation, and that is not exactly straightforward. I would like to see enhanced AI capability added in the future. They could enhance it in analytics, especially in that area.

I started working with Cisco Meraki MX approximately five years ago.

Stability with Cisco Meraki MX is almost guaranteed, and it is pretty high.

It is not easy to scale because it has some limitations when you try to expand. The limitation is technical expertise needed to be able to go from one layer to the next; for example, you probably need a new device.

I previously rated support for Cisco Meraki MX as six points out of ten. The first issue is a time delay. Secondly, you do not just get the support that you actually require; you get mixed and matched solutions or broad-based answers to specific queries, and that is very frustrating.

ROI in the long term is a plus, and it is realized pretty fast, but that is in the long term, not immediately. Between 25 and 30% is what you might see when talking about savings.

Pricing-wise, Cisco Meraki MX is number one; it has a clear lead over competitors because it is more expensive than all the others put together.

The client is actually aware of what they need and which model they are looking for. I would rate this product seven out of ten.

I work mostly with Cisco products, including Cisco switches, Catalyst switches, routers, and Cisco Meraki MX, specifically the access points, firewall, MX, MR, and MS.

I have been both a user of Cisco Meraki MX and someone who performs configurations, installation, and support for Meraki customers.

I have been both a customer and a reseller of Cisco. I use Cisco Meraki MX in my office and have deployed it for several customers.

I assess the operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment as quite robust. I believe it is one of the best networking solutions available. They have very good products, especially in terms of operational resilience, and they are able to run for long periods without issues with an uptime that I consider among the best I have seen. Several features keep network admins at ease and make it easier with their support for those products that have Smart Net or support contract subscriptions that assist through TAC.

I find that Cisco offers a substantial number of tools for end-to-end visibility, either working from the Cisco side or integrating with other vendors. I know there is Catalyst, previously known as DNA, and all Cisco products come with that subscription license for integration, making it quite a handy tool for seeing the end-to-end visibility of my network operations.

Regarding Cisco Meraki MX, I find the cloud management quite handy, allowing me to access dashboards that provide good telemetry and insightful data about the performance of my network, including the kind of access users have or the resources they are able to access over the network. It also gives health insights, health checks, and updates from Cisco Talos and their utilities to keep me informed about changes in technology, particularly in security.

I feel that Cisco Meraki MX is less of a next-generation firewall. In my assessment, compared to most next-generation firewalls from Fortinet and Palo Alto, it seems more like an application firewall and could be improved further. While it has some nice features, for a very large organization needing comprehensive next-generation firewall features, it could perform better. Aligning it more towards those features would be very handy, as well as broadening the market appeal beyond SMEs to include larger corporations.

In the future, I would appreciate additional features beyond next-generation firewall capabilities, particularly better integration with deployment at various network levels, operating effectively as a data center firewall and controlling east-west traffic for campus access. Such features would make it a versatile option across network positions.

I have been working with Cisco Meraki MX for the last six years.

I assess the stability and reliability of Cisco Meraki MX as quite reliable. The only issue is that without access to the internet, it may not control east-west traffic effectively. However, it is quite useful at the perimeter and well-addressed for the features most SMEs require.

I find that Cisco Meraki MX scales well for most solutions, primarily designed for the small market. I am uncertain if they have products for larger markets, though I know they produce different tiers based on throughput. In terms of integration with other solutions, it performs adequately and seamlessly. However, larger needs may necessitate higher models in terms of capacity and performance.

I rate their technical support as a ten out of ten.

I would describe the experience with deploying Cisco Meraki MX as very straightforward and easy. Cisco provides excellent documentation, making it accessible even for those who are not highly versed in networking. Once you set it up with basic network knowledge, implementation is seamless since it is mainly GUI-based with no CLI required, which is beneficial for those without extensive security deployment knowledge.

I find the pricing for Cisco Meraki MX reasonable and competitive given the features provided and the target market. I believe it is acceptable.

I see some good competition, particularly from Sophos, which I consider quite a challenger in the SMEs market, and Fortinet with some low-cost firewalls that bring next-generation features that Cisco Meraki MX does not have, indicating a significant competitive landscape.

Overall, I give them an 8 out of 10, noting that there is great competition available, and I believe they have room to improve or catch up with the competition. I assign this product a review rating of 8.

My main use case for Cisco Meraki MX is primarily for SD-WAN and security.

Cisco Meraki MX has impacted my organization positively. I'm selling it to other customers and partners, which means it's very important for them, and I see this is making a significant positive impact for them.

The positive impact I've seen for my customers is that Cisco Meraki MX means easy management, easy setup or scale up, and flexible licensing.

In my opinion, the best features Cisco Meraki MX offers are the best security features.

What I personally appreciate most about Cisco Meraki MX is cloud management and Meraki protection filtering.

Specifically, what I value about the cloud management and protection features is the ease of use plus scalability. You can scale up or scale down, and the auto update feature is excellent.

I would add that auto VPN is a great feature as well.

I believe Cisco Meraki MX can be improved if its price were lower; it would be significantly better.

Additionally, I would highlight the need for full integration with legacy Cisco SPs as a required improvement.

I have been working with Cisco Meraki MX since it was acquired by Cisco in 2012, and since then, I have also worked with Meraki MR and MS.

Cisco Meraki MX is, in my experience, top stable.

The scalability of Cisco Meraki MX is rated 10 out of 10; you can scale up and scale down with no effort.

The customer support for Cisco Meraki MX is great because it's part of Cisco, so the support from Meraki is the same as Cisco. I can rate it nine out of 10.

Positive

I previously used a different solution before Cisco Meraki MX, which was Fortinet.

I switched from Fortinet to Cisco Meraki MX because while security in Fortinet is stronger than Meraki since it's a security company, the management for Cisco Meraki MX is better than Fortinet.

I have seen a return on investment with Cisco Meraki MX because of the time saved through cloud management. It saves cost as well because it's controller-less; you don't have a separate controller or separate management platform.

My experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing for Cisco Meraki MX is that for more than five years, Meraki licensing has always increased. If Cisco can make the pricing less, customers can purchase more licenses. This would enable customers to buy more than they currently do.

Before choosing Cisco Meraki MX, I evaluated other options besides Fortinet, including Huawei, because it's cheaper.

A specific example of how I use Cisco Meraki MX for security in my organization is that you can describe it as a router with a flavor of security, or you can describe it as a firewall with a flavor of router. This means you can use it as a router or a firewall with routing capabilities such as RIP and VPN, along with threat and protection features.

My advice to others looking into using Cisco Meraki MX is to understand the difference between cloud management and a cloud solution. Don't view it as a cloud solution; it's a cloud-managed solution and it's totally different. Sell it to your customer as a cloud-managed solution, not as a cloud solution.

I chose this rating because the cloud management is really effective. I rate this review a 9 out of 10.

The main use cases for my customers with Meraki MX are cloud managed virtual controller, basically for managing the Wi-Fi, managing the switches, managing everything through software defined, cloud managed solutions. There is great flexibility with no need to be in the office every time to do network maintenance or for changing Wi-Fi passwords configurations specific, event based SSID creations.

A lot of activities can be achieved in work from home scenarios as well. Many of the use cases nowadays involve majority of data center switches and data center firewalls being upgraded to Meraki MX for convenience, flexibility and software-defined solutions. Apart from this they also have the solution for the management of users logins based on the authorization authentication in a uniform manner. Many of these features are unique in the brand.

The other features that are most useful for network security are that they are the leaders in the market in cloud managed network security. Their SD-WAN solutions are very effective and most cases now involve VPN-less access for the majority of companies' private networks.

These became Zero Trust networks and Zero Trust access. Meraki MX is among those top solutions in their exceptional approach towards VPN-less, Zero Trust client access to office private networks.

The SD-WAN capability of Meraki MX enhances network performance by reducing bandwidth utilization and increases availability. Additionally, multiple branches in different countries and continents can be connected as one WAN network, making all users connected continuously with convenience. Separate authentication is not required to access networks in different countries. All this becomes completely seamless, saving time and reducing security risks.

The highest security algorithms are configured between these branches over the SD-WAN, where the network becomes uniform across the world. Users have service access or network access without knowing they are actually in different countries or cities. Additionally, passwordless authentications enhance the user experience. By increasing these user experiences, productivity has been enhanced across companies and client employees.

I recommend that Meraki MX should improve to be a better solution for the next release by being more competent so that we can offer it as a primary solution among all other brands, although I don't have any specific feedback, while the competitors are also ahead of these solutions.

Enhancing user experience is always required. Enhancing the seamless connectivity is crucial and user experience enhancement is needed daily, otherwise people find it outdated. New features should look and be dynamically connected, and users should not be bothered frequently when connectivity issues occur. It should automatically remediate and find out the issue and then resolve it on its own without interrupting the work of the employees.

I have been working with the Cisco solutions with Meraki MX for about 7-8 years.

Meraki MX is using AI to improve network management and security. AI is one among those additional layers of convenience added. It reduces the IT manager's job and IT mistakes, manual processes, and configuration errors.

AI operations function seamlessly when you add a client, as it knows how to segregate the client. It will automatically add the policies and generate the client-related specific employee security policies, giving access based on the segregation we apply.

Meraki MX is easy to set up, I would rate it 9 out of 10.

Overall, Meraki MX is very stable, I would rate it 9 out of 10.

Scalability is an obvious concern with Meraki MX. You can't scale beyond some value. They are not highly enterprise grade, when you have hundreds of thousands of people it is very difficult to scale in Meraki.

I have seen usual challenges with Meraki MX, such as sometimes we don't get the access points online, or connectivity related issues. When we raise a ticket with Meraki MX, they instantly become available to support us for configurations or troubleshooting. In the majority of cases Cisco support is good. We immediately get the support to solve the issues, in case of any challenges or incidents.

I can rate the support 10 out of 10.

Positive

Meraki MX is obviously expensive.

The cost of a device varies based on the Meraki MX device, whereas if you buy the same access point in Aruba, it is three times costlier. I get it for $25,000, a device that can connect up to 75-100 users, whereas in Meraki MX, it goes to 75,000-80,000 per access point.

I am an implementer.

My clients are small to medium businesses, with about 800,000 employees to 2,000 employees. They are mainly in IT, manufacturing, pharma, schools, and universities.

I recommend that for a class experience for security reasons, or convenience management, cloud-based solution, when you look at all of them, people should prefer Meraki MX as leaders in software-defined networks and cloud managed networks. I rate Meraki MX 9 out of 10.

Cisco Meraki MX started in the SMB or small enterprise segment, providing price-performance benefits for customers in that segment.

I have worked with Cisco in hybrid or distributed network setups. One area involves on-premises deployments, and the second is large campus and distributed setups.

The majority of my work is centralized, and a few projects depend on the client and the specific project requirements. Most deployments are centralized while some are distributed.

Regarding specific challenges, issues, or pain points that Cisco helps address for clients with hybrid or distributed setups, I have not encountered any.

I do work predominantly with on-premises deployments.

When assessing the operational efficiency of Cisco in the IT environment, I have never run into multiple issues when it comes to challenges.

When considering whether Cisco optimizes the experience in both distributed enterprise setups and centralized setups with my clients, the experience is optimized whether distributed or centralized.

Having end-to-end visibility from Cisco affects the organization's troubleshooting capabilities positively, making things very simple when you have visibility across the entire portfolio.

What I like about Cisco Meraki MX is that the best feature is everything being under one administration. I can have the MX, the MS, and the MR, which is the wireless, along with the appliance, so everything can be managed from a single window.

Regarding the visibility offered by Cisco, I think it is adequate.

The key benefits that Cisco Meraki MX brings to the table include the ease of configuration and deployment. It is extremely simple to deploy, optimizing the device and configuration, and the ongoing management is extremely simple. It fits this segment of the market very well.

When discussing improvements in Cisco Meraki MX, the features that Meraki offers in MX are very simple and quite extensive, targeted for this specific segment. I do not see any need or gaps in that management.

Regarding potential improvements in integrations with third parties, I think a few customers feel that the pricing is expensive. However, even though it is priced at a premium, it delivers as expected. Therefore, price in most cases may not be the deciding factor when it comes to a product like Cisco or Cisco Meraki MX.

From the features perspective, the functionality is comprehensive, with all listed features and capabilities present in the product.

I have been working with Cisco Meraki MX for over five to six years.

When assessing the stability and reliability of Cisco Meraki MX, I can say that we have had absolutely no problems. It is extremely stable.

Regarding how Cisco Meraki MX scales with the growing needs of the organization, it is targeted at a specific vertical. If customers are looking for very large-scale deployments or need to migrate, Cisco Meraki MX may not be sufficient. For larger-scale needs, they would need to look at the Cisco Firepower series.

As for the tech support team, I would rate the support for Meraki as absolutely fine. The support is excellent, earning a rating of ten out of ten.

When it comes to the setup process of Cisco Meraki MX, I find it straightforward with no challenges.

When it comes to the cost-effectiveness of Cisco Meraki MX, I find it cost-effective and would describe the return on investment as positive.

I work extensively on Fortinet for unified threat management in addition to Cisco.

Comparing Cisco to Fortinet technologies, I would say they are at a similar level, differing only in the deployment modes and performance, which varies between model to model. In terms of the ease of configuration, I would rate Fortinet as far more easier to configure than Cisco Meraki MX. The GUI is far more simpler.

I procure Cisco through local distributors.

For those who are looking into Cisco Meraki MX, my advice is that it all depends on the size of the client. If they fall within that segment and if the performance and specifications of the products in Cisco Meraki MX portfolio are adequate or meet the requirements, they can choose the right product. I would rate this product ten out of ten overall.