Meraki MS Switches Reviews

I have experience with Cisco products as I implement a lot of them. For example, I implemented switches and access points when I worked for infrastructure in a motorcycle company, and I implemented 199 wireless Cisco access points for a hospital.

I also implemented Cisco Meraki MX and Meraki VMX when I worked for NS BlueScope. For the office zone and IT zone, we separated the IT and OT segments. I implemented Meraki for IT, but we used Cisco for OT.

I am still working with both products. I work with Meraki for the IT side, but I also use Cisco access points for the OT side.

I do implement Meraki switches because I work as an infrastructure security engineer. When I worked for NS BlueScope, I made a change because almost all of the switch office zone reached end of service for Cisco switches. Then I changed to Meraki for all IT areas.

From a security view, Meraki MS Switches are easy to patch because normal Cisco switches are very hard to patch or update IOS. With Meraki MS Switches, I can set up auto patching when usable. For example, I can set patching and auto patching at midnight.

I use the Zero-Touch Provisioning feature for security and try to use Zero-Touch for IT security. Zero-Touch Provisioning helps streamline my deployments by ensuring that every system does not trust anybody or anything, requiring identification and authentication while implementing MFA. Every request includes not only external but also internal network traffic, which I have to declare for verification by using authentication.

My assessment of Layer 7 application visibility on my network management strategy indicates that I attach to normally connecting and implementing everything on Layer 7, but sometimes I have to choose lower layers of the seven-layer model.

Network access controls have helped enhance security. I use role-based access control by role-based access permission. I have to implement authorization for permission, and every owner has to allow access. I create policies and steps for requests for access from different departments.

I evaluate the benefit of virtual stacking in managing my network switches by using VLAN for implementing segmentation because many companies have security issues. This is the best practice for separating segmentation for each level. For example, most companies need to separate IT from OT side and implement deep segmentation from OT. I have to separate production to protect security. I use VLAN because micro-segmentation can be very complex and require upgrading hardware. However, it is an easy way to implement segmentation using firewalls for each level for security reasons.

Network cost and sustainability impact my network cost. I have experience implementing greenfield projects. Normally, I design redundant core switches to distribution switches using star mesh and redundant links, sometimes utilizing EtherChannel in Cisco switches for redundancy. For example, I implement EtherChannel from distribution switches to access switches for redundant links for robustness if any link breaks.

Meraki MS Switches are easy to manage, but I believe they are more suitable for use on the IT side because Meraki faces the internet, requiring an open connection through the internet for control. It is not the same as Cisco switches, which operate via command line. I normally use command line for configuration, while Meraki utilizes a cloud-based dashboard that necessitates a constant internet connection for configuration. Therefore, I find Meraki MS Switches more suitable for the IT side.

The improvement needed for Meraki MS Switches is the ability to connect in the worst case when I encounter internet issues. When I cannot connect to the internet and need to configure or connect directly to Cisco switches or access Meraki for changes, I face difficulties.

When Meraki MS Switches can be configured without an internet connection, I think I can use Meraki MS Switches on the OT side.

The only improvement I seek is configuration without an internet connection.

I am still working with both products. I work with Meraki for the IT side, but I also use Cisco access points for the OT side.

I do not have any problems with Meraki MS Switches.

I find the pricing of Meraki MS Switches quite similar to Cisco's prices. I think they are cheaper and better.

I rated Meraki MS Switches an overall score of eight out of ten.

I am using it in the Government industry. I work for UNBS. We use Meraki MS Switches for aggregation. Our company has about 1,000 to 2,000 users.

I find the central management and the cloud dashboard features of Meraki MS Switches most useful and the management dashboard.

It's useful because I can monitor from our branches effectively.

The traffic analysis capabilities help us to know how much traffic is coming from the branches, because our internet link is aggregated at the head office. So it helps us to be able to either upgrade our links or downgrade them, depending on what kind of traffic we see coming through.

What could be improved is that when a switch disconnects from the internet, you can't make any changes to that switch. Sometimes the switches lose internet connectivity, and we can't do anything to manage them or change any configuration until the internet is restored.

I've been working with Meraki MS Switches for two years.

I don't have any complaints about the stability of Meraki MS Switches.

I have not faced any challenges with the Meraki MS Switches.

They're quite scalable for my environment.

We plan to increase the usage when we get good information from the monitoring.

I have never contacted Cisco support for any issues on Meraki MS Switches.

Positive

It's different from what I was used to before I started with Meraki MS Switches, but once you get into it, it's easy.

I used Cisco switches before Meraki MS Switches.

I would rate the setup of Meraki MS Switches six out of ten.

The deployment process is quick now that I'm used to it, but the first time it was challenging.

The first time it took me about two hours to configure Meraki MS Switches.

The price of Meraki MS Switches is reasonable.

I use Cisco products and Meraki MS Switches. I am a user on the user side.

Network security is handled by our firewalls and other solutions.

I have not explored the area of network management AI in Meraki MS Switches.

For other switches, when you buy one, you can just start configuring, connect it to the network, and it works. With Meraki MS Switches, you have to first whitelist the MAC address, let it have internet, then you can manage it.

They're deployed on-premises.

They're quite acceptable, so I recommend them to those who want to use Meraki MS Switches.

The biggest benefit that I see in Meraki MS Switches is central management and the cloud dashboard.

I rate Meraki MS Switches 8 out of 10.

We are using Meraki MS Switches to create a local site LAN for branch offices or other sites, as we manage and deploy all these switches centrally for our many international offices.

The feature that I find most valuable in managing network traffic with Meraki MS Switches is the possibility to have an overall view from the web portal, along with alerts and logs that are analyzed by an AI tool to provide a straight read and pre-analyzed reasons for problems, which improves network troubleshooting.

From our experience using Meraki MS Switches in branch offices, the improvement I've noted is the ability to manage all devices together from a single portal, which enhances management, while security largely depends on configuration rather than product functionality.

From my perspective, I don't have any indication for improvement regarding Meraki MS Switches, as our usage is quite basic and we don't need very sophisticated features. For core sites, we are still using Cisco switches, and we are evaluating Arista instead of Cisco for the core. However, for branch offices, Meraki MS Switches are more than enough and integrate well with Meraki Wi-Fi.

I don't have any indications for features that could be added to Meraki MS Switches to make them more versatile or appealing to customers, as what they provide currently is more than enough for us. I believe there is some room for improvement in scalability.

I have been working with it for about two years.

There have been no main issues when we deployed the solution. It was straightforward installation.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the stability of Meraki MS Switches at an eight.

In terms of scalability, I would rate it a seven.

In terms of technical support of Meraki MS Switches, I can't provide feedback since we haven't had the need to get their support often—maybe just once—so I don't have enough experience with support requests to evaluate their responsiveness or helpfulness.

Positive

We had four engineers who participated in the installation.

I haven't seen any specific return on investment from implementing Meraki MS Switches, as I can't provide any numbers. There could be benefits in global management, but I can't quantify any improvements, such as a ten percent increase.

We don't utilize automation in Meraki MS Switches, and although we know it could be helpful, we still tend to manually deploy and configure devices.

Regarding pricing, it's hard to say if it's expensive or affordable, as it depends on the comparison. For our usage and needs, the price is reasonable, though of course, lower is always better. I would rate the price as a six or seven.

We want to test the integration of AI in Meraki MS Switches in the future, but we haven't used it yet.

I would recommend Meraki MS Switches as a good solution for branch offices due to their ability to provide good global single-point management. This is the best feature for deploying devices worldwide where local support is lacking. The hardware is standard, and it's not a differentiator, while the unique aspect is the web management via the Meraki portal.

On a scale of one to ten, I rate Meraki MS Switches an eight out of ten.

We have multiple sites across India with over thirty-five test plants in our network. The device management tools and logs are very user-friendly, making it easy to manage our network. 

It has simplified our management process.

With the license, you can manage and track all logs from the dashboard, making monitoring very easy.

We prefer Meeraki to be installed only on a local network rather than in a cloud-managed network. Meraki MS Switches are one of our largest categories, with over thirty-five deployed. 

However, the switches sometimes go offline, preventing us from effectively managing our networks. This issue arises because Meraki switches rely heavily on cloud connectivity. Given our need for reliable local network management, it would be beneficial if Meraki could launch an on-premises software solution. This would make it easier to manage the local network independently of cloud connectivity, especially when the cloud connection is down.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for three years.

Meraki is very stable, with approximately 95-98% uptime. There are some occasional port fluctuations. Sometimes, simply replugging or transferring the connection to another port resolves the issue. There have been instances where a restart was necessary. 

We are managing over 35 devices. The solution is scalable.

The technical support requires improvement. We have observed network loops at several sites, which we manage remotely. We sought technical support during these incidents, but communication was very challenging. Therefore, from a support standpoint, improvements are necessary. Having local support personnel who can better manage such situations would be beneficial. 

Neutral

When comparing Meraki MS Switches with our current Catalyst switches, we find that using Catalyst switches managed through a controller is highly beneficial. Installing the controller to manage all switches is straightforward and ensures efficient management. The Catalyst switches are known for their stability and longevity, with many features still operational five to six years after installation. Regarding stability, 

Catalyst switches offer 99% reliability, compared to 92-98 percent for Meraki switches. Additionally, Catalyst switches have proven to be more robust against resource and performance fluctuations than Meraki.

The initial setup is easy. It typically takes two to three hours, and we have a single engineer for it.

Meraki MS Switches are highly beneficial. They significantly reduce troubleshooting time and enhance network stability. Features such as automatic loop negotiation and intuitive configuration options have saved our engineers considerable time. 

One engineer can manage over 35 users.

The licensing for Meraki MS Switches is good and reasonably priced. While the cost is slightly higher, approximately 5 to 10 percent more than some competitors due to market conditions, it remains an excellent value given the benefits. This slight premium is justified by the comprehensive features and support plans offered.

The security features of Meraki MS Switches are excellent. They include advanced capabilities such as built-in security measures and the ability to manage all features through the Meraki cloud dashboard, making configuration straightforward. Key features include port blocking and traffic management, allowing detailed control over network traffic. Additionally, Meraki MS Switches offer built-in firewall functionalities within the dashboard, enhancing the overall security level.

I highly recommend the Meraki MS switches to manage multiple local call center locations. Meraki is an excellent solution because of its enabled dashboard and the ability to manage it with a license from anywhere. However, one drawback is that it can only be managed with Ethernet. This limitation is quite specific to these switches. Otherwise, Meraki is a reliable solution for managing other remote setups.

We are considering Meraki MS Switches, their capabilities, and how they align with our expansion plans. We may need features like CI integration or related functionalities. Understanding the AI tools available with Meraki and identifying those applicable to our site requirements is crucial. First, we must comprehend the tools' capabilities and where they can be effectively deployed. These are key considerations that require clarity from Cisco.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight-point five out of ten.

We are working with Citrix and router, but in Cisco for Cisco vendor only. We are taking from them since 2015. 

The main use case involves some small business customers needing one router, one switch, and two to three access points. It is easy to handle the devices with just a small knowledge of switches.

Meraki MS Switches have allowed us to access devices from anywhere in the world through the cloud. This eliminates the need to be physically present, as I can troubleshoot and work on devices remotely.

The most valuable feature is the ability to access devices from anywhere in the world through the cloud.

It would be helpful to have more features like an iOS interface. Most people are familiar with the Cisco commands, and it would be beneficial if the switch could be accessed by GUI configuration and by normally accessing the console.

We have been using the solution since 2015, and we began taking from Cisco in 2016.

The devices are reliable, and there is no indication of issues so far. If something happens to the device or hardware, Cisco will automatically change the device by the next business day.

Customer service and support are effective. If the devices are licensed, the support team will assist you depending on the severity level of the case.

Neutral

Pricing is affordable, and licenses for the cloud need to be purchased every three to five years.

We are recommending all of the features available in Meraki MS Switches.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use Meraki MS Switches for VLANs, remote configuration, and having a single interface for configuring all our sites. Additionally, we rely on 100% remote configuration.

Meraki MS Switches provide a single global management interface in the cloud, allowing us to access any switch configuration from a single interface.

One of the most valuable features of Meraki MS Switches is its precise traffic analytics capabilities, allowing us to query the system for any place at any time.

There are compatibility issues with certain Power over Ethernet (PoE) devices, which we would like to see resolved.

We have been using the solution for three years.

The solution is stable, but there is always room for improvement. We faced issues following firmware updates, which we now handle by performing updates outside of working hours.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate scalability as eight out of ten.

Cisco's tech support is pretty good, and I would rate it an eight out of ten.

Positive

We did evaluate other options. We chose Meraki switches because it provided the ability to manage remote switches effectively, offering good control over all our equipment remotely.

The setup process was pretty straightforward, and I would rate it an eight out of ten for ease.

It's difficult to calculate return on investment. The primary advantage is the centralized and online access to switch configurations.

The solution is a bit expensive as it is on the high end. The cost depends on the model and the number of years of usage.

We evaluated other options but Meraki was the only solution that offered good remote switch management.

I would recommend using Meraki MS Switches as it is good equipment, sturdy, and works well.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use Meraki MS Switches for larger companies, as part of our organization, where they are connected to the servers here via VPN. They are used daily.

The stability and workflow of Meraki MS Switches have most improved our network management. I also appreciate the high availability offered by the solution. I use it because the environment is working fine with no major problems and it's easy to manage.

Meraki MS Switches is a complete solution. I don't have specific feedback for improvement. However, there was an issue with the uplink when the port was removed and had to be reinstalled, which caused a temporary dropout.

For three years.

I find Meraki MS Switches to be stable, with no significant issues reported.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

I don't have much experience interacting with Cisco technical support.

Positive

Before Meraki switches, we used a mixed solution of Cisco switches. There were no problems with these solutions, but they wanted a more unified approach.

The initial setup was conducted by a third party. I'm not directly involved in the setup process.

A certified third-party team handled the implementation of the solution.

Meraki MS Switches, including their licensing, are somewhat expensive, particularly when compared with competitor solutions like HP.

I recommend Meraki MS Switches for larger companies rather than small businesses. Small businesses might benefit more from other solutions.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I am primarily focused on the Catalyst wireless port portfolio and the switching portfolio, which includes the 9200, 9300, and 9500 series, among others. I also work with Meraki, including the Meraki MX firewall, MS switches, and Microsoft products, among others.

Almost all of my functions perform very well. I don't require anything else. It is very good in the management console, which is managed through a single dashboard. That's why I mostly recommend Meraki for small setups and remote office locations for clients using MS language.

The prices are a little higher than other vendors. However, within the Cisco customer segment, customers mostly recommend it because they are existing users, and they are satisfied with their current usage.

I have been using this solution for the last three years.

If there are many users and a heavy data load, heavy data traffic, I am not suggesting Meraki. I am focusing on Meraki Catalyst for live usage. It is not scalable enough, and I do not recommend it due to its switching capability.

I receive support directly from a Meraki dashboard. The support is excellent and rated ten out of ten.

Positive

I have mostly been using Cisco for the last 15 years. I do not work with other vendors. For switching portfolios, I focus solely on Cisco.

The initial setup was straightforward, especially with the API setup. I simply go to the dashboard, insert a dashboard license key, and add a device. I can then see their GUI-based dashboard and configure it according to my requirements. For single fleets, the setup usually takes 30 to 60 minutes.

I have a technical team for the installation part. They manage our technical communication well.

I am very satisfied. The investments made are justified by the satisfaction with the Mediatek solution.

Local Meraki support is excellent. They assist on each and every deal, especially regarding the size of BOQs. 

I would rate the overall solution ten out of ten.

I am a system integrator and my company is a partner for Cisco.

The ease of use and manageability from anywhere, whether it is from your mobile app or anywhere else with an Internet connection, is a unique selling point. It helps reduce network overhead by not requiring engineers to support the system.

The most valuable feature is the cloud management architecture from Meraki. The control plane is in the cloud, and the data plane is local, allowing manageability from anywhere.

Meraki requires more models, especially with respect to PoE Switches, to support Wi-Fi 6 capabilities. Meraki should also consider improvements in stacking features, particularly in the lower-end models like NS130, where stacking isn't supported, unlike with Cisco traditional switching.

The ease of installation and configuration saves time. Most things are automated, allowing for pre-configuration and readiness even before the delivery of equipment.

The network overhead is reduced as they don't have to hire engineers for support. The ease of use has helped reduce overall support costs.

Meraki pricing is a little premium compared to other vendor products. However, considering the features and ease of use, they are seen as pioneers in cloud management.

Meraki needs more stackable features. It would be beneficial if Meraki had stacking security in more models, especially at the lower end.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I am using MX400, MS320, MX250, and MS250. We also used MX64 before. We have replaced it with MX67.

The solution is efficient and easy to run.

The product has no CLI. The solution must provide a command line interface like the one in the Cisco environment with a proper iOS interrogation ability. It's the biggest thing for me because we don't know what these devices are doing half the time. It takes a long time to know we've committed a configuration change in Meraki. Sometimes, we have to wait for long before anything happens.

I have been using the solution for at least five years.

We have also used Cisco routers. They were plugged into NETGEAR Switches in our branches throughout the country. However, my organization wanted more visibility and the ability for our first-line support to do things rather than needing a higher technical level. So, we switched to Meraki.

The tool is expensive.

I will recommend the tool to an organization depending on its needs. It is a convenient product. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.