Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

I use the tool in my company for spine and leaf architectures and to deploy new data centers.

The benefit of the tool is that it is a stable product. You can find enough expertise in the market to hire someone for help if required. Cisco's technical support is great.

Cisco Catalyst Switches offer familiarity with operating systems. The operational knowledge that I have gained after working with Cisco for around ten to twelve years is the sole reason I prefer it. The stability in the operations that I get with Cisco Catalyst Switches, the support it offers to users through the articles available over the internet, and the expertise related to the tool available in the market are good.

There are multiple operating systems across Cisco's portfolio, which is problematic. Cisco's firewall has some different operating systems, while Cisco's routers have a different operating system, so you might need to have people with different expertise, and the learning curve might be a little high as compared to other network providers, which might have common operating systems across different types of devices.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for ten to twelve years. Currently, I'm not working with Cisco. I have my own startup organization where I provide services related to networking devices.

It is a stable solution. I have no complaints about the tool's stability.

It is a scalable solution.

Around 100 people in my company use the tool.

I have experience with the solution's technical support. I found Cisco's support team to be one of the best in the industry.

I rate the overall tool a seven and a half out of ten.

Neutral

It doesn't take much time to set up any Cisco device, but again, it depends on how comfortable you are with the tool. From my personal viewpoint, Cisco Catalyst Switches are pretty much easy to set up.

The product's deployment phase initially starts with a discovery and a design workshop. After that, our company mostly automates a lot of stuff based on the design and discovery workshop, where we come up with some artifacts with respect to configuration, and then we leverage some automation tools to deploy it.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

Depending on the size of the deployment, around eight to ten people are required from an operation standpoint, and not more than two people are required to manage the deployment process.

The solution can be deployed with help from an in-house team.

The licenses are definitely expensive. There is a need to make annual payments towards the subscription or licensing costs attached to the solution.

Before a user picks up any product or solution, due diligence should be followed. Though Cisco offers many services, features, and functionalities, better solutions might be available in the market. If users need only ten features, it is better to choose a solution that offers only ten features rather than opting for something like Cisco, which offers over a hundred features, making it an expensive product.

I rate the overall tool a seven and a half 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. 

It is an infrastructure tool, so it is just providing a backend service. Its most useful feature is that it operates on a regular basis. It is reliable. 

Cisco is weird about their pricing models, so that's one problem. Their operating system is also a little outdated.

I have been working with this solution on and off for about ten years. We are using the Cisco Catalyst 9000 series.

It is generally a very stable solution.

It is weird in terms of scalability. By the time you get to the point of scaling up any equipment, which it is capable of doing relatively easily, it is usually out of date. You end up having to rip and replace everything anyway. So, technically, it is scalable, but in practicality, it is not.

We're sticking with this one for a while. I am not aware of any plans to increase its usage.

Their tech support has always been very helpful to me. I have no issues there.

If you are trained, it is very straightforward. You have to be skilled in order to get it going. They do provide support for those who don't have these skills.

In terms of maintenance, one person could support a thousand people, but that would be a very busy job. It is better with a team.

The best advice would be to get your training done so that you get a good overview of all the solutions.

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

Typically, the solution is used for a client's official network and several times as a replacement. A client may use it to replace the total network LAN switch. 

Mostly the LAN switching is the most valuable aspect of the solution.

Clients often do not emphasize specifications of Catalyst features. They just need a switch for an office LAN and other segments. 

There are several versions of Catalyst, and yet, they are quite similar. If, in the simplest one, they could create a Catalyst segment where all the possibilities like QSFP, SFP, 10G, that would be ideal. MikroTik, a Latvian company, has that as an option. They include 1G and 10G and QSFP all in one switch. Cisco, however, divides it into several switches across these features. Cisco is likely doing it to make money. However, clients sometimes don't want to pay more for the switches and they ignore Cisco and grab other brands like MikroTik. As distributors, it makes it hard to sell Cisco when features come at such a high price. 

Another issue is the restrictions on the product. Cisco applies restrictions in relation to renewals on a yearly basis. Many other brands don't have restrictions. If Cisco lifted them, they wouldn't lose so many clients to competitors.

We've been using the solution for a long time. It's been about seven to nine years.

The product is quite stable. It doesn't crash or freeze and there aren't any bugs or glitches. It's quite reliable.

You can scale the solution and you can choose different versions that fit the sizes of a variety of organizations.

Our clients range in size. Some are smaller organizations. Others are enterprise-level companies.

We talk with the support that is based in Bangladesh. They have an office in our country and provide support as necessary. We have contracts for one to three years and they provide technical and phone support to us. The support is fine, but it takes time sometimes to get the assistance we require. 

As resellers, we work with other solutions, including Huawei, Juniper, MicroTik, and some other brands in China (as well as Cisco).

Recently, Huawei has been doing good in switching segments. They're bringing some new features that are better than or compete with Cisco, and they are very aggressive in pricing. 

The problem is they're doing only Enterprise segments. They are not doing SMB.

The initial setup isn't too complex. However, we have very well trained technicians that really understand the process. For them, it's easy.

If our clients request it of us, we can maintain the switches for them after implementation.

We can assist our clients with implementation if they request the service.

The pricing of Cisco products is quite expensive. Huawei, for example, costs much less.

There aren't extra costs for additional features. All features are standard.

We are resellers and distributors. We're partners with Cisco.

We use a variety of different versions of the solution, including 3003, 29603, and 9003. Those are three of the most popular. Which we use depends on the client and their particular needs. Sometimes we only resell the product to our clients and sometimes we also provide the solution and install and configure the Catalyst for the clients. It depends on the client's query.

Overall, I would rate the solution eight out of ten. Overall, our clients have been quite happy with the results they get from Cisco products.

Access layer Switches. VLAN Segmentation, Inter-VLAN and LAN Routing. 802.1X network access device.

This platform has enabled reliable connectivity across the entire campus network. Great performance and stability ensure that the network is available where you need it. The 802.1X port security and other security features work well and help keep the network secure. PoE helped us deploy WLAN APs, security cameras, and IP phones with minimal cabling.

• Very stable and dependable switches.
• The wide range of features will be enough for almost any LAN environment.
• The CLI is pretty much the same across all switching and routing platforms from Cisco, making deployment of new switches, replacement of damaged equipment, or upgrades to newer platforms very easy.

I have found no major drawbacks in the Catalyst platforms. The price is high, but for seemingly the best LAN switching platform available, coupled with Cisco's excellent support, the price doesn't seem to be too much.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

Technical support is the best I have worked with.

Basic switching functionality works out-of-the-box, as with any other switch. Complexity will depend on the task at hand, but if you're familiar with the Cisco CLI you should have no problem finding your way.

Pricing of Cisco equipment is high, but I think these switches are worth the price.

I have been working with Catalyst switches for 10 years. Cisco support is among the best there is. Use it.

AWS Direct Connect.

• BGP
• Familiar CLI

We have used BGP over IPSec to AWS but there were problems with bandwidth. I migrated to the Catalyst C3850 because AWS Direct Connect doesn't need IPSec. We have to use the QoS (CBWFQ) function. I understand the function of QoS and it is easy to use.

It's a stable product.

Technical support is average.

The initial setup was easy.

The pricing could be better.

I would suggest looking into the Cisco Nexus 92160YC-X. It has a lower price than the C3850 and high performance, but the CLI is different.

LAN and WAN links in our offices and data centers.

When we started deploying Cisco switches in our new office, we were able to deploy them very quickly. There were no problems at the configuration stage and this allowed us to start work as quickly as possible.

Stability. We have many Catalyst switches now, and they work without any downtime. We work with government companies and we can't allow the business to stand idle.

It would be good if they added some machine learning which would allow us to abandon the rigid rules for processing traffic priorities and, at the same time, save money, because equipment with similar logic (like DPI) is much more expensive.

Soon, we plan to migrate to the cloud infrastructure. It would be good if the Cisco switches worked quickly in the cloud, like their hardware devices. Ideally, they would be like OVS-DPDK, but they would work out-of-the-box.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

We don't use Cisco support. In our company, we have our own support team with various CCNA and CCNP engineers.

Previously, we tried many different solutions but we had some trouble with stability and scalability.

The initial setup was pretty easy. The first setup was not that big and it was deployed in one day with only two engineers, one CCNA and one CCNP.

Cisco's prices are not cheap, but the stability is worth it.

We tried many vendors including D-Link, HPE, and some cheaper vendors.

It's a very good product but the price is high, so I would rate it at eight out of 10. Overall, it's worth it. Cisco switches have rich functionality.

We primarily use the solution for the LAN and WAN.

Configuring the solution is very easy. It's quite a straightforward process, and it's not difficult at all.

The solution has proven itself to be very stable.

We've found the solution to be quite scalable.

The initial setup is quick and simple. Technical support is very good.

You need to have dual powers, dual power points for each to take into account the redundancy.

Compared to other switches, the Cisco products are expensive.

I've been using the solution for a long time now. It's been ten years. It's been at least a decade.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs and glitches. It doesn't crash and freeze. It's reliable and the performance is good.

The solution scales well. If a company needs to expand it out, it can do so with relative ease.

Everyone in our company uses the solution. We have about 4,000 employees currently.

We do plan to continue to use the solution going forward.

Cisco is available for support. We've been satisfied with them overall. I have no complaints.

When I started with this company, they were using Cisco, and they've used Cisco since then. I do not know if any other solution has ever been used.

The solution was not complex to set up. It was very straightforward and simple. It's a hot spot, and therefore everything happened very quickly. The experience was very good.

It took our IT department about three hours to set everything up for us.

We have 11 IT personnel in our organization that are capable of handling maintenance and deplyment.

I'm just an end-user. Our IT department handled the installation and it was very simple. They didn't need the assistance of consultants or integrators. They handled it in-house themselves.

The price is higher, however, I would argue that with the price you are getting a lot of value for money. That said, compared to other switches, the Cisco switches are expensive.

We pay a yearly licensing fee to Cisco.

We keep changing the version as it comes in. Every time we are going a new installation, we do the new modem.

Cisco switches are superior. They're a robust product. Therefore, I would rate them at a nine out of ten overall. We are very satisfied with the technology. 

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.