Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

I use it for connectivity for my enterprise users. My entire platform is on Cisco, and we have different plans.

There is a lot of improvement in the network segment after replacing the older switches.
I have not seen any kind of issue with these switches since deployment. They are pretty much stable. 

Cisco can definitely improve the training part. They can provide more training related to configuration.

We have recently done an upgrade. We installed these switches around one year ago.

It is a pretty much stable product.

It is scalable. We have 1,500 users.

Technical support is managed by the vendor so far. The vendor is taking care of any issues.

The entire implementation was done by the vendor, but we are managing it in-house. We have a Cisco-certified vendor to do all kinds of implementation and train our people. The overall project was for six months, but because of Covid, it got delayed. We have finished it may be a month back. We have four different locations. The vendor deployed technical manpower of six to eight members for each location. 

We had just one issue with a switch, and the replacement was done within a week. The connectivity was not going through, and it was giving packet drops. The issue was identified, but because of Covid, there was a delay from Cisco. Our vendor was able to ensure that there was no installation delay. Because we had 3% to 4% stock over and above the inventory for installation, they used the switch from that particular inventory, and later on, they provided the switch within a week.

I don't see any price issue with Cisco. Whenever you buy a quality product, you always have a mindset of paying the premium amount.  For any good product, you pay a premium amount, but that also means you are going to recover that premium over a period of time in terms of performance.

I would recommend this solution. It is a pretty good product. We don't see any issue with Cisco Catalyst Switches. We have a license of five years as per our current agreement with Cisco. We plan to keep using these.

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

I am a solution architect and design authority. I define what we need and in which direction we are going to look. We then do some detailed investigation, get reports back, and make a decision. We are working on air traffic control systems. We use this solution for data centers and remote clients.

It is a pretty good product. I don't see a problem with this product. Cisco Catalyst Switches fit the best for the type of systems that we deploy. Our customers usually are happy with Cisco equipment. Many partners and third parties have ordered this solution.

Its initial setup can be simpler, and it would be great if we can work with a reference architecture.

Cisco has the capability to provide a very integrated solution. They have DNA Center, Cisco ISE, Cisco Prime, FMC, and AMP. We are looking at all the products, but it is rather complex to pick out the right licenses that you need. The license structure is a bit complex. Sometimes, there is an overlap in products, which does not really make sense. For example, you have DNA Center and Cisco Prime, and it is not really clear what you would use for what exactly.

There is a lot of information on the Cisco website, but it takes a while to go through all this and look at the presentations that are available from Cisco Live. These presentations are appreciated, but sometimes, they are a bit too much like bullet points. You don't exactly know what's behind it, so you have to do a second guess. Overall, there is a lot of information but not always to the point.

I have been working with Cisco switches for 30 years.

It has pretty good stability.

Scalability is pretty good.

We have experience with professional services. If we do a design, usually we can get some support. After we deploy a new network, we can get professional services from Cisco to help us. I think that is fine. I had an experience with Cisco last week, where they wanted to sell professional services to help us in the early design phase, where things are more conceptual. They shouldn't do that. 

Cisco should help based on the reference architecture. They should help the potential customer to get started without asking for money. I think Cisco equipment is expensive enough for that. I have no problem paying for professional services after we deploy it or when we do a detailed design. When it is early in a project's phase, we should get help from them to go in the right direction. It should be part of the normal business to work with an initial customer.

The initial setup works well if you can build on earlier projects, but if you really have to make a completely new design, you will struggle a bit. We are working on a project now, and we have our experienced network engineers on this project, and they are struggling. The initial setup could be simpler.

It would be great if we can work with reference architectures. I have also seen something like this with other suppliers, and I really liked it. I have seen some of the ideas in the Cisco Live presentations, but I'm not sure if it is really complete and clear enough. It should be worked out a bit further so that we can work with reference architectures, and then let's say base it on multiple products that you would apply in the reference architecture. 

Cisco products are not that cheap.

I would definitely recommend this solution. I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

The switches are for network infrastructure in an enterprise.

Catalyst switches are easy to use and simple to work with.

I would like to see support for one-touch provisioning.


By use zero touch provision , We do need a lot of config for system boot and other, That should be improved.

https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/...

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for about 20 years.

The Catalyst Switches are stable.

This is a scalable product. We have about 1,000 users.

The support is amazing, although they could be a little faster.

I have not used other similar products.

The initial setup is straightforward. The installation takes about 30 minutes per device.

I install this product on my own. We have about 10 IT staff who can work with these switches.

This is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We have an Academy, we know how to manage it. We have the knowledge to manage it and it gives us security. We can configure the switch to resolve our internal problems. We can use one switch for five to six years.

It's used for our processor, a small data center, and we have our network with at least 500 users.

The most valuable feature is the interface, it's easy to configure. The command line uses a switch that gives us security.

In the next release, they should lower the price. It's too expensive. 

They should also have a graphic interface for the switches too without the command line. 

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for ten years. 

The stability is good. 

We have 500 users. 

It requires us to have at least 10 technicians. Five technicians and other administrative staff.

In the future, we need to do disaster recovery in the cloud. We are working on-premise and our future is to use it on the cloud for our disaster recovery.

We have a contract with a company that gives us support.

The initial setup was not very complex. 

We used a consultant for the implementation. 

Licensing is on a yearly basis. We usually spend up to $20,000.

I would recommend it because it's a good solution that gives you security and is easy to use.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten. They respond to all of our needs. 

My primary use case of this solution is for connecting up drivers and desktops. I'm a system administrator and we're a customer of Cisco. 

I like the expandability of the solution. I have a pair of 6509 catalyst switches and they use the add on boards. I also like the dual power supplies. 

We are not working off the latest version so the switches on the product are very old and that could be improved. The one gig boards are strictly one gig and not backward compatible. This switch also does not have power over ethernet, so that's old.  

I'd like to see a better web interface. I can't tell you what the existing generations have so I'm sure there have been improvements. These are so old and I'm sure modern switches now have much better tools to interface with them.

I've been using this solution for over 10 years. 

It's clearly very stable, otherwise we wouldn't be using it anymore. The fact that we still use it shows how stable it is. 

That switch was very scalable because itwas one of the ones that had nine slots in it. So it could have additional boards within.

The initial setup was fairly straightforward but we're not doing anything fancy with it.

We're not paying maintenance - these switches were end of life years ago. Maintenance is separate from licensing. Now there is no additional monthly recurring cost on the Cisco switches that we are running.

This solution has been good to us, it's very solid.

I would rate this solution a nine out of 10. 

We don't personally use the switches; we provide services to our clients, including implementing the switches for them.

Catalyst switches solutions are great. For various customers we have deployed for, business operations run smoothly and without any complain. Troubleshooting and insights are clearer. 

Our customers love working with us. 

Catalyst switches support a variety of features from both layer 2 and layer 3. The fetaures supported depend on the model your dealing with. Though there are various common features such VLAN, MLAG, SDM, STP, Resiliency, PoE, Wireless settings, etc....which Stacking feature happens to be the most common deployment. 

Recently I laid hands on Meraki Switches and what I can say to love is its seamless network services to build high-performance networks. 

The user interface needs improvement. It might make them a bit more user friendly.

The one thing that I came across with the Catalyst 2950-X switch was that I wanted to alter the dashboard, so I connected it to the management interface. I gave it an IP address and I used the browser. However, as soon as I accessed it, I realized that the system of the computer from which I was accessing it didn't support that version. I was using Linux and the OS didn't support the switch. I had to get a Windows computer to access the switch. The dashboard was difficult to manage. It would have been nice if they made it obvious that it didn't work on Linux.

I've been dealing with the solution for more than two years now. 

I wouldn't say that the switches are stable. It depends on the situation more than any fault in the technology, however.

If a customer approaches my company, we provide the best option for the client. Sometimes that's Catalyst. We do work to evaluate the client and their needs quite extensively before making recommendations. Most of the time, clients look only at the cost and not at the bigger picture. Many don't want to spend too much money. Sometimes, however, a better solution may cost more.

While a well-implemented product is typically stable, if a client says that they don't want to spend anything higher than X, you have to work within those parameters and explain what X will get them, which may ultimately be instability.

Very scalable. 

We have dealt with Cisco's technical support in the past. They were especially helpful and very polite. They are always there if we need them and their insights are always excellent. I would say that we have been satisfied with the level of support we've gotten so far.

Of course, we use and still use Meraki solutions. We didn't switch. Like I said, it is based on what customers need. 

The Catalyst switches take more time to implement than Meraki. How long it takes varies for each organization. It depends on the size and requirements. We have spent up to a few weeks on previous contracts setting up switches for companies.

Catalyst licensing varies from a thousand of dollars to 20+ thousands dollars , however, that might depend on the model or version you choose. There are some switches where the licenses are features-based and you need to get a specific license for specific items if you want to use them.

We've looked at Meraki, among other solutions.

While we have used Meraki, it's hard to compare them to Catalyst switches. Meraki is quite good and agile. They've simplified a lot of their processes and have some features that make actions easy to do on Meraki. However, Catalyst offers much of the same features, and are possibly more feature-rich.

Meraki is very much more focused on business needs. While it may be good for their own business model, it doesn't encapsulate everything. Catalyst does a better job in that regard. It has many more features on offer. You aren't limited, although you will want to focus on a particular kind of feature list for your deployment or your integration into your environment.

Cisco happened to own Meraki solutions now. 

Last year, we were Cisco partners, but something happened and Cisco made some changes to its partnership requirements. Right now, we are working on re-establishing the partnership with Cisco. We'd like to be partners again.

We are planning to be a distributor. For the moment, however, now that we are waiting on the partnership, we're more of an integrator. 

We have deployed on-premises mostly and also a hybrid version sometimes. It depends on what the customer wants and what fits best for their needs. It also depends on the model that you are talking about. On the Catalyst switches, as far as I know, the models vary from types of deployments and features. Some features are only available on applicable switches.

In terms of advice I would give to other companies, I'd say that I like both Meraki and Cisco. I don't really prefer one over the other. It depends on the situation which one makes the most sense. Both are very large solutions but I could recommend either.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I really do love Catalyst switches. 

The switches are the easiest to deploy and maintain out of other competitors.

In terms of technology, Cisco is the leader in everything. I'd rather buy a second-hand Cisco switch than a brand new switch from a competitor. They're that reliable and resilient.

Cisco offers many ranges of switches and you'd know exactly if you were buying an access switch or a core switch distribution. They are definitely among the top companies. They just know how to predict things and what will evolve in the following years.

Out of the competition, Cisco switches are easily the most expensive.

There's something at Cisco called a console that is used for basic configuration and everything and I think that they excluded a normal USB. Instead of that micro USB they should put in the normal one. It would make things a bit easier.

I've had experience dealing with the solution since 2010. It's been about ten years now.

The stability of Cisco is unmatched. We don't experience bugs or glitches or have any issues. There's been no worry of crashing. The technology is impeccable.

The scalability is quite good. We've never had any issues with scaling if necessary.

If the company pays for a given device's Smart Net - that's Cisco's official name for support -  then the support provided is huge. It could be challenging for people that want to fix an old switch or a router but do not have paid support anymore. That's not the case for us. I do think Cisco could be a bit better at assisting in those instances instead of just putting customers in a position where they have to buy a new device where an old one just needs a repair. Beyond that, we have no complaints and have been satisfied with the level of service they provide.

For me personally, the initial setup was very straightforward. I have experience with the product so it helps. if you are a user who has the experience, it shouldn't be too difficult to implement. Otherwise, you will have to spend some time learning about it and how it works.

Everything depends on the size of the network that you want to design and implement. Of course, you need a consultant if you need something with 200 users or so. Or if you don't have any expertise in IT. The question is, is Cisco switch easier or harder to configure than some other brand or our vendor? And the answer is that, in my opinion, Cisco switches are not among the easiest ones to deploy, however, they are definitely the most reliable switches. 

Cisco is easily one of the most expensive on the market, but users are buying quality and reliability.

The company I work with is a Premium Cisco partner. I've even based my career around Cisco vendors.

The solution is on a Private Cloud that we are renting (including equipment and the data center space and the LANs). We have obtained everything from Alban India, and our customers are mostly on our product site with the cloud. The customers include various financial companies, payment providers, etc. We're a systems integrator.

I would easily rate the solution ten out of ten. It's really great.

In terms of advice for other companies, I'd say that whether Cisco would work for them or not depends on the size of the network they want to cover. The small and midsize network users just really don't need to spend that amount of money on Cisco equipment, but the larger organizations and mission-critical environments definitely require Cisco.

I am a network engineer and work primarily on Cisco products, including the Catalyst Switches.

The most valuable feature is the ease of configuring a switch. It gives you a lot of control.

The community support is good.

I am satisfied with the documentation that is provided by Cisco.

Reducing the price would be an improvement.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst switches for the past year.

This solution is definitely stable.

I would say that this product is scalable.

I have never used the Cisco technical support. The community support is pretty good and there are a lot of resources available online.

I have not used networking products by another vendor.

Catalyst switches are pretty easy to install. It takes between 20 and 30 minutes per switch.

I am the only person who is maintaining the switches.

This is a product that works find and I definitely recommend it. Interface-wise, it is pretty straightforward and I haven't had any issues with it.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.