NETGEAR Switches Reviews

Our major use cases include audiovisual installations and we mainly use the AV line for that. We work with the VLAN support feature.

The best things about NETGEAR Switches are the support they provide and the ease of implementation. The ease of installation helps with network performance. It helps to secure our network traffic.

I need to think more about potential disadvantages or areas that could be improved. In the Engage software, it would be easier to do inter-VLAN routing. Real-time analytics would be helpful regarding the analytics aspect, and this feature is not yet present and would be an improvement regarding analytics.

We have been using it for four years.

I would rate the stability at eight points out of ten. I rarely see glitches, but we had some minor glitches over the past years, and they were easily resolved; it was mainly due to the fact that firmware upgrades didn't completely succeed.

If I were to rate scalability, I would give it seven points out of ten. I give it seven because we used to use a lot of the 4300 switches and they're not completely compatible with the new AV line.

I would rate support from NETGEAR Switches nine points out of ten.

Positive

If I were to rate price, I would give it eight or nine points. It is an expensive product.

When comparing the solution with other switches, NETGEAR Switches stand out in the market for me.

We are using NETGEAR Switches today and we are using something hands-on. We are using it as an integrator. We are using PoE capabilities. I give this review an overall rating of eight points out of ten.

We use NETGEAR for IT-related tasks such as connecting printers and access points. It's primarily utilized as a layer-two solution. Additionally, one of the NETGEAR switches is deployed at a retail outlet.

It is difficult to quantify the return on investment because it's an unmanaged switch. By having unmanaged switches, we don't need to spend a lot of time on configuration or management, which simplifies our operations.

NETGEAR offers a competitive pricing structure, which is beneficial for cost management. The precision time protocol feature caught our interest for future use in specific settings like churches, where low latency is required.

NETGEAR should focus on eliminating single points of failure. They should introduce features like dual firmware or dual boot that allow systems to be updated without downtime. The user experience on their website needs improvement; it's often confusing which switches support Insight cloud features.

The NETGEAR switch has been in place for a while, approximately three to four years.

NETGEAR stability falls between a six and a seven out of ten rating. We've experienced failures such as a 16-port dying after three to four years.

NETGEAR's scalability through its Insight Cloud system is on par with Ubiquiti's, although it must offer features beyond its competitors. Higher-end switches deploy more advanced features, such as those needed for precision time protocols.

Customer service navigation is not user-friendly; the website is confusing, making it difficult to find pertinent information. There are issues distinguishing which switches support cloud features.

Positive

Ubiquiti solutions were used previously. Their limited customer support and liability issues with their operating system prompted a change.

I did not set it up personally. It was already installed when I began working with it. Since it's unmanaged, we don't have to configure it continuously, simplifying the process.

The installation involved two or three individuals from a different location.

The return on investment is hard to gauge due to the limited management required for unmanaged switches. The switch is operational with minimal intervention, which is expected for unmanaged solutions.

NETGEAR is reasonably priced, between a six and seven out of ten on the pricing scale. Some high-end switches required for specific advanced features, like precision time protocols, can be more expensive.

We are currently testing Grandstream switches and have explored Ubiquiti products. We also have quotations for Aruba Instant On yet have not deployed it primarily due to its dual setup options with limited cloud access. Grandstream is evolving and offers the potential for zero-trust provisioning.

NETGEAR is a viable option if you require cost-effective solutions. However, ensure the product aligns with your requirements for more advanced needs and cloud features. Always look for features that differentiate it, such as AI integration or comprehensive cloud provisioning.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We use NETGEAR Switches for networking, particularly for switch-to-switch connectivity. We connect them with core switches, especially for camera installation.

NETGEAR Switches have increased the throughput and speed of internal communication, and have improved our network efficiency.

The most valuable features are routing and access control. Integration is very easy compared to other brands, making configuration straightforward even for any IT professional.

They can improve on the commercial part, specifically the cost, as it is higher than other brands.

I have worked with NETGEAR Switches for the last five years.

It is working fine.

The integration part is very easy compared to other brands. The scalability of NETGEAR Switches is easy and very beneficial for us. I would rate the scalability nine out of ten.

There is no issue with the support. If anything arises, we get good support.

Positive

The initial setup was rated eight out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy to set up. Initially, there were some challenges because it was the first time, but later it was fine.

The deployment was done in-house. We used three people: one to manage all switches, another for power connection and cabling, and a third for configuration.

The cost of switches is higher than other brands. I would rate the price of NETGEAR Switches seven out of ten, where ten is the highest price.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The solution helps with infrastructure planning. If you have a point-of-sale system, you can use these switches to connect the internet devices through the right Ethernet cable. 

That gives more flexibility instead of trying to get the Ethernet cable in the infrastructure wall. We use these switches to help us leverage and connect more devices.

Support could be improved.

If you buy Cisco Ethernet switches, they last seven to ten years comparatively. Cisco is more prompt in resolving issues.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

It’s video data, and the throughput required is high. We have 24/7 communication from the cameras to the recorders and servers. We require switches that have good buffering capacity and very low latency. There should be no latency in the video data we receive from the cameras.

The solution helps transfer data.

There should be absolutely zero latency in the data transcriptions. Bottlenecks occur wherever we place aggregation switches. There is a lot of delay in the data coming to the servers. We require faster throughput.

The product must be more stable. There may be scenarios where we don't have a good UPS. When there are glitches on the line, the switches hang up. It is a major problem. The stability of our appliance is much higher. They don't generally hang up.

I have been using the solution for a few years.

We do not have any issues with stability.

The tool is scalable. We have a team of two engineers who deploy the tool in most of our network. The technicians do the cabling.

The setup is straightforward. We receive support for optical fiber installation.

The product is priced economically.

Customers generally prefer Cisco. The general perception is that Cisco is more secure and has better encryption. People who cannot afford Cisco choose NETGEAR and D-Link.

My organization is involved in the integration of surveillance cameras. We propose solutions to our clients. Generally, in IT networks, the data comes in parts. There would be no activity for a few moments, and then the data would be transferred in a second. In our case, there is a continuous data stream. We require 10 Mbps bandwidth for a 4 MP camera. I recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

The interface is comfortable for the new employees of our company. I think it's not a problem because our IT team, with probably only two hundred staff, handles our network well. We've tested our recovery systems, and everything is working fine. I don't remember any accidents or issues on our IT network in the last year.

The tool is good, but we probably need another model with PoE connections. Our office plans to switch from analog phone lines to VoIP next year, and we need a model that supports this transition and can handle the required technology. Additionally, improved support for newer technologies like Wi-Fi would be beneficial.

I have been using the product for five years. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. 

About 50 percent of my company relies on NETGEAR Switches. I rate its scalability a seven out of ten. 

I have only contacted technical support twice, and they have resolved my queries. 

Positive

I have worked with HPE and Cisco switches. We chose NETGEAR Switches because we didn't have the budget to change the equipment.

One engineer was enough to handle the deployment. 

I haven't had any issues with the product, and it's worth the money. 

NETGEAR Switches' pricing is low compared to other brands. I rate it an eight out of ten.

NETGEAR Switches offers good value in terms of price and quality. I rate it an eight out of ten. I think this is because I suggested this solution for our company, but for a larger company, other types of equipment might be better. For example, equipment with a lifetime guarantee might be better. We don't have a contract, so I didn't rate it higher.

I use the solution in my company for just our internal networks.

The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it works properly. From the moment the product was plugged into our company's environment, it has worked properly without bothering us. The technical people just plugged it in and took care of the setup of firewalls and routers, and everything worked. Most of such tools are often simple to plug in and get working. I haven't dealt we haven't dealt with any unreliable stuff with the tool.

My company just bought all the stuff, plugged it in, and started to work, after which we never had to think about it.

The tool does not offer extra firewall security. The product already has firewalls in it, but I believe that something can always be improved and can prove to be useful for users. The tool should offer extra firewall security.

The product should try to remain competitive in the market and needs to work on offering more firewall security since it is considered to be a never-ending aspect when it comes to such solutions.

I have been using NETGEAR Switches for ten years. I am a user of the solution.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten. I have not faced any issues with the product whatsoever.

If my company bought a switch with a 24-port, there is nothing we can do with it if we run out of it, and all we can do is get another one since it is easy to change. There has never been an issue with the tool. You just get the right size in the first instance, if possible.

The tool inherently is not scalable, so any questions associated with its scalability do not apply to it. When you buy a 24-port switch, you should know that it is not designed to be scaled up.

I have experience with some other brands. NETGEAR Switches and other products are all the same.

The product's initial setup phase is easy. The deployment process has always been easy for routers or switches available in the market. I haven't found any difficult deployments. I am not an expert in deployments since my company has technical people to deal with the deployment area, so it has been an easy process.

One person can deploy the solution.

The solution can be deployed in 15 to 20 minutes.

You just need to plug it in, and it will start working. The product has been on the shelf doing its work for years together. There is no actual revenue return from the product as it can be considered as a tool that is more of part of our company's infrastructure.

NETGEAR Switches can be considered a big brand, so its pricing point is a bit higher than that of some of the other players in the market. In the market, there is some junk stuff available, especially the cheap ones out of China, that might get you into some kind of trouble, so my company does not buy such solutions. My company prefers to go for quality products like NETGEAR Switches.

No maintenance is required for the solution.

It is very easy to integrate the product with the other systems in our company's infrastructure since you only need to consider plugging a cable. My company does not integrate the product with any product specifically since we only consider integrations with the networks and infrastructures.

As the product needs to be plugged in and it starts working, I can say that it is a reliable solution that works. The tool also offers quality, especially if you consider how you would not know whether an unknown product that you choose would work for you or not.

I recommend the product to others.

I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We use it based on customer requirements. If a customer says they need NETGEAR installed, then we are ready to provide NETGEAR customer support and are willing to pay Cisco.

The service for NETGEAR is very prompt. We personally know the NETGEAR process. If there are any problems, they try to support customer support.

In the last two or three years, Cisco products have been unavailable. That's why we switched to NETGEAR for remote capabilities, etc.

Moreover, I like the stability. The Netgear build is stable. We haven't had any problems with NETGEARs in the last few years.

The output is good, but one thing I would like to see improved is the response time for technical support. Currently, it takes more than 15 to 20 minutes to connect with a technician through the toll-free number. It would be much better if the call could be connected within five or two minutes.

NETGEAR is a good product. We've been using it for more than ten years. 

The stability is good. I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

The scalability is good. We have different projects at different locations, each with 50 to 100 users. However, we don't track individual users in housing complexes.

We have dedicated technical personnel. If we encounter any problems, we can contact NETGEAR directly.

NETGEAR's technical support is also good. They have their own office in Kolkata, which makes it easy for us to access and communicate with them.

Positive

We have completed more than 60 to 70 projects. Additionally, there are many end users.

After receiving a project, we can start the inquiry. We make the switch within two months.

We work in the government and corporate sectors. We require it regardless of the segment.

We have seen a good return on investment. NETGEAR switches are reliable, scalable, and affordable. We haven't found any other product that offers the same combination of features and price.

It's cheaper than Cisco. For the features it offers, the pricing is good. 

For example, if we need a specific feature like VIN, we can access to an appropriate suite like L2 or L3. Similarly, if we only need basic network functionality, a simpler and more affordable option like a normal suite would be ideal.

We focus on virtual experience and profit margin. If there's an opportunity on NETGEAR or Sophos, or Ubiquiti, we'll recommend that product. If not, we might recommend Ubiquiti. We're not dedicated to any particular network brand. We can deal with them all, including Cisco, depending on the customer's needs and budget. So, we have all the reputed products. 

For NETGEAR, it has a wide range of switches and routers for different needs. We choose the appropriate model based on our specific requirements.

Overall, I would rate the solution a ten out of ten. 

The solution is used as a networking device.

The solution is good.

The security features must be improved.

I have used the solution for ten years.

The tool is stable.

More than 200 people were using the tool in our organization. We were using it regularly.

We have upgraded to Cisco because it has better security features.

The setup is not complex, but it is not easy. The deployment can be done in half an hour.

Our network engineers deployed the solution.

Overall, I rate the product a seven out of ten.

We have a five-story head office and deployed NETGEAR switches here, running for the past two years. We have 1,000 employees working in this building.

Centralized monitoring is there, but competitors like Cisco Prime are at a higher level of centralized monitoring where you can jump into any switch from anywhere and do the central maintenance. NETGEAR should consider that.

It's been almost two years since I started using NETGEAR switches.

The product is very stable. The managed switches are reliable, and we have not faced any issues so far with uptime.

The product is scalable. We have more than 100 switches.

In my last organization, we worked with Cisco, standardizing our network equipment with them. In this organization, we've been working with NETGEAR. So far, the feedback I've received is that it's good. However, I've worked with Cisco for the past 15 years at Tata Steel, but it's just been two months for me here. Going forward, if NETGEAR creates trouble, we will replace it with Cisco.

Cisco has a world-established brand, so Cisco would be better in those terms. I have seen it working for the past 15 years. We have a refresh policy where we replace all the switches and the network's other active components every four-and-a-half or five years. I'm not sure what the policy is in this new organization, but I know that NETGEAR has been used here for more than two years. We'll be working out some new policies at the current organization. The pros with Cisco are the reliability and the number of hours it works and that there's no need to manage it. However, the same goes for NETGEAR. The cons with NETGEAR is that I'm unsure about its market share. Cisco has a very good reputation and is a market leader.

Besides that, Cisco has the advantage of being managed centrally through a central management suite. But NETGEAR, I have seen that we need to log into the switch to take it remotely.

The product is easy to deploy. The time to deploy the product depends upon the deployment scale. A single building deployment would take days while configuring a single switch would take hours or minutes.

We do the architecture, and our engineers do the deployment. The product is easy to maintain. We need more people to manage our switches; if one switch and link are down, we would need at least two or three people to manage it.

We have local partners here to support and network experts. We have not faced a case where we have to contact the OEM.

NETGEAR is a cost-effective solution when going for a small enterprise or a small-scale business. In those cases, I recommend NETGEAR switches. But I recommend Cisco if it's a very large-scale, enterprise-level organization. I can't recommend NETGEAR for enterprise businesses since I have not seen NETGEAR switches deployed through thousands or tens of thousands of switches.

I rate NETGEAR switches an eight out of ten.