Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

My primary use case is to assign VLAN or a port for VLAN on the main network.

An area for improvement would be the documentation and training on configuring this product.

I've been using this solution for four or five years.

I've had no problems with the stability of this solution.

Scalability is fine.

The initial setup was complex because it was a common line.

Licenses are available on a three-yearly basis.

I would give this solution a score of nine out of ten.

The best feature is the technical support.

An area for improvement would be the high price.

The setup was complex, as we had some issues with the new SMARTnet and DNA.

I would rate this product as ten out of ten.

When it comes to Cisco Catalyst Switches, one can say that the legacy switches are stable. We have been using them for so long and there are many who feel comfortable with their use. This can vary with the business size, some being entry, medium or enterprise level, which means its use is geared towards every level. 

All other modules have comparatively many more functions or power than regular Catalyst switches.

We have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches since the outset, for more than 20 years. 

Being legacy switches, Catalyst switches are stable. We have been using them for many years and there are many who are comfortable with their use. 

Nexus, which uses NX-OS, runs on a different operating system than CatOS, which means that the latter tends to run on OS - just like a Cisco router - only with the functioning being a bit different. While NX-OS is very different, even when it comes to the command line, most things are the same. 

However, NX-OS already introduced a different concept, which is more like a carrier level. They have a dedicated command management module. All other modules have comparatively many more functions or power than regular Catalyst switches. 

Catalyst is a legacy system and we are already utilizing the 9000 series, including 9200, 9300 and 9800 for different use scenarios. As Catalyst covers all levels and areas, I cannot think of anything needing improvement. It is getting to be very good, performance-wise, at the moment.

We are talking about a network portion. Catalyst and Nexus switches are all part of the network domain. 

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches as a nine-point-five out of ten, since it is a great, albeit imperfect, product. 

We use Catalyst switches to extend our network throughout the facility. It's a big facility, so we need to use switches the ABS to get the signal out to the entire facility.

I like Cisco because you are dealing with something old that the new generation doesn't know about, like telnet or how to configure the switch. I don't like simple GUIs where you can do everything with a click. 

I can't use older Cisco devices with newer versions of the controller or switches. For example, if a switch was manufactured in 2014, I can't use it with a controller made in 2019. I have to change the switch so that I can upgrade my network or my devices. I don't have the option to update the version I have on the image of the AP or the controller.

Also, in the K5 Series of the switches —  Cisco calls them "Core" switches — they have some commands that Catalyst doesn't support, so you have to know the command lines for two different devices to configure them. It's a bit confusing when you are working on both at the same time, and you have some problems, then you notice that you didn't use the correct command for that switch.

I've been using Cisco Catalyst for five years, but I've only been working with the solution in-depth for the past few months.

Catalyst Switches are reliable. We don't have major problems like lost connections, and we only have a minor issue with something every few months. In the last five years, a switch broke down once, and that was due to human error.

Cisco customer service is excellent. We had some issues with devices, and Cisco replaced them for us. We had some significant problems with one of the switches because they changed the image. It took a while, but overall, the support is good.

It's not hard if you have some networking experience. I didn't deploy the switches by myself. We had some help from the vendor, and I supervised them.

With some competitors, yes, it's about, let's say very high price. Half the price you can get Jupiter, or I think also, I forget the brand, TP-Link, you can have something like that, but half the price with it, with maybe also advanced features to deal with it.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst switches seven out of 10.

My primary use case of this solution is for my company's network connection. 

The most valuable feature is how easy it is to use. 

This product could be improved with cheaper pricing. 

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for five to six years. 

This solution may be scalable, but I don't have much knowledge on its scalability. It's used for my company's networking and there are about 500 users. 

I installed this solution myself. 

I implemented through an in-house team. 

Cisco Catalyst Switches are a bit expensive. 

I rate this solution a seven out of ten. I am satisfied with the performance of these switches and would recommend them to others. 

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches for an SD-Access solution.

The solution works well with analytics.

Cisco Catalyst Switches could improve by having more integration with third-party products.

In the next release, I would like the solution to be able to integrate easily with third-party WFi products.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for approximately five years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches have very good performance and are reliable.

The solution is scalable.

I have been satisfied with the technical support. They are very good.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are complex to implement, it takes a lot of time. You need to take a lot of time to learn out to configure the solution.

Cisco does the maintenance of the solution for us.

The price of the solution is expensive compared to other products from America or Europe. They should have more competitive pricing.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We use Cisco Catalyst Switches for network connectivity.

The performance of Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

The only improvement I would like to see with Cisco Catalyst Switches is the pricing.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for five years.

We use Cisco Catalyst, 9000 series.

The stability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

In our organization, we have more than 7,000 users.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are quite scalable.

Technical support is excellent.

If there is one area where Cisco excels, it is in technical support.

We use Dropbox occasionally. OneDrive is mainly what we use. We also, use Teams.

The installation is straightforward. It's plug-and-play.

To deploy and maintain Cisco Catalyst Switches, we have a team of four people, which includes one manager and three administrators.

You can install Cisco Catalyst Switches yourself.

We pay the licensing fees annually because we have an enterprise license agreement.

There are other products that I personally prefer, but from an organization's perspective, I would recommend this solution.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of ten.

The solution has been issue-free.

The solution is scalable.

The stability of the product is good. We've had no problems whatsoever.

Overall, the pricing has been good.

Technical support is very helpful, even during implementation.

The initial setup is simple.

There are some models that can occasionally cause problems. If a particular switch is made for some specific use case or a particular environment, if you put that in other types of infrastructure or use cases, then you may face problems.

The licensing process could be a bit less complex.

We have dealt with the solution for about three years.

The stability has been good overall. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance has been reliable. 

The scalability has been good. If a company needs to expand it, it can. However, you do need to have the right model, otherwise, you run into issues with scaling. 

We have 15 to 20 clients that use this product.

We have good technical people and an experienced technical team who can install those switches, and do a level of troubleshooting and escalations.

For five years, we've used Huawei. Three years ago we started with Cisco. This was mostly due to networking, as we don't have a team five years back. After that, we got the team specifically for networking and we started that with Huawei, and we got a very good response in the market. Unfortunately, due to the Chinese market, and all that stuff, that didn't last. That said, the customers who are using the technology, are still happy with the support as well as with the product.

We also occasionally use Aruba.

We didn't work with Juniper as an installation system integrator, however, we have with Cisco (including Nexus and Meraki) and Huawei, and we have had a very good experience. 

The initial setup is good. It is easy. If you know the commands, even basic commands, you can do the normal installation. If you want to go for V-LAN and other things, routing, et cetera, level three switches kind of installations, then you may need some time and knowledge. 

For deployment and maintenance, you need a minimum of two people. Three or four is also good if it is enterprise. There are some customers where we have to do installations at three or four sites simultaneously and we have to complete that within one or two days or within a specific downtime. If the network is down, everything is down. That is when you require multiple team members. Otherwise, if that is one site and one installation with one day's worth of downtime, with two people, you can do it easily.

Support is helpful in regard to the implementation process. My team didn't find any issues with installation.

The solution's pricing is pretty good. As far as whatever else is available in the market, for example, if you compared it to Aruba, Juniper, or other enterprise solutions, the pricing is reasonable.  

You do require licenses. There are some licenses that you need to procure separately. By default, the licensing process is good.

Everyone has their own licensing structure. With Cisco, once you do a setup two or three times, the process gets easier and the licensing gets clearer. Until then, licensing is a little bit tricky.

We do not use the solution in our office, however, as Test System Integrators, we have provided the solution.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's been quite good overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies.