Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

I use Catalyst Switches in the lines of our local networks. We also use ASR routers from Cisco in one. We have other branches and about 20 or 30 buildings. It's a very large network.

The most valuable features of Cisco Catalyst are the DHCP features that I use in our routers and the PfR connections. Someone said a long time ago that he who buys Cisco is never fired. They have good solutions. 

At present, we are adopting many cloud solutions. We are connected to several cloud platforms and do a lot of business in the cloud. So I think that in general, we don't need many features at the moment unless we want to create some applications on the cloud. But that's not the case right now. We are thinking of moving all the people from these 20 buildings to one building. So with all of them in the same building, we'll need to design a new architecture. We have the ACI in our data centers, so we must see how all of this works. We don't know if we'll go to SD-LAN too. So I don't know if we'll use Catalyst or another solution—a solution with ACI, SD-WAN, or SD-LAN. At this moment, I can't say because we are starting to think about this new design.

I've been using Catalyst Switches for about 25 years.

Catalyst Switches perform very well, and the network is stable. 

Catalyst Switches are scalable.

If we have a major problem, fixing it takes two or three days and six to eight engineers from Cisco. When they escalate a ticket, it goes through too many levels. Every time the issue is passed along to a new person at Cisco support, they ask the same questions repeatedly. However, if we have a problem that requires a quick fix, Cisco support can handle it in one or two hours. But if we need two or three guys from them, it gets complicated. I don't know if the problem is, but it seems like they spend too much time analyzing the problem and passing it along to other people. Other vendors like Palo Alto and Aruba resolve problems more quickly.

Having worked with Cisco for at least 25 years, I think it's easy, but I don't know if someone with less experience would say the same. It's easy because it's very fast. We have some labs where we implement things, and then it's mostly copy-paste — copy the configuration and paste into a new suite. So it's not difficult. Catalyst Switches don't require much maintenance. Sometimes we have problems in our network, but mostly they're not actually problems with the network itself. The business thinks that the problems are in the network, so we must call Cisco to help us prove that we don't have a problem. We can prove that, but if the data service is from Cisco, it's better. All of them. We have about seven or eight people in my company working directly with the Catalyst Switches.

Catalyst Switches are costly. When I started working with them 25 years ago, prices were a problem too. In my opinion, they are good, of course, and they are the answer to all of our questions. I can say that.

I rate Catalyst Switches nine out of 10. I would recommend them to others. I don't know when they will design a new edition of the bigger switches. Because if you have a branch, for instance, you a small Catalyst. You don't need a large Catalyst. But whether it's a small or big installation, I recommend Catalyst.

We have customers that use Cisco Catalyst Switches for SMB, enterprises, schools, colleges, and universities. We have worked with almost everything except the federal government.

The Cisco software ties all the hardware together better than the competition. Cisco used to license their IOS software to HPE for their own switches, which were decent switches as well. HPE has been through a bunch of different changes over the years and now has Aruba switches. 3Com was part of HP for a while and the ProCurve was the original HP switch that I remember.

Cisco Catalyst Switches do not have an open architecture and you have to buy into the Cisco architecture to be able to use them.

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

The solution is extremely stable and reliable, this has been proven from many years of use.

Cisco Catalyst Switches can be used in any sized company. We have customers in small to enterprise companies, with our largest being General Reinsurance. Multi-national companies would benefit the most from the use of Cisco switches. This is why the international community likes this solution because it can be used anywhere in the world.

The paid technical support is very good.

I have used many other switches, such as HPE, Juniper, and Aruba.

The installation is a definite effort to get everything set up and working correctly. They do not work out of the box. However, these days they have improved a lot and the new Cisco solutions today would be much easier to put together than the ones in the past.

The cost of Cisco switches is a little more expensive than the competition. However, as the saying goes, "you get what you pay for." If you want a reliable solution and other benefits, Cisco Catalyst Switches are worth the money. 

There are additional costs for support.

My advice for others looking to implement this solution would be to work with a reseller, such as us, that has a good history of working with Cisco and can give the customer a good short and long-term plan.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We use Cisco Catalyst Switches as access switches, for connecting to what we call the last mile within the office. We connect from the patch panel to the wall jack. 

We use layer three switchings to interconnect between branch sites.

It is easy to use. I have only had one course on Cisco Switches.

The pricing needs improvement.

Price stops entries in Africa. We are not at that level where IT is considered a very big business enabler.

When I compare with the competition, MikroTik or NETGEAR I can purchase the switch and use it for whatever I want. I don't have to add the license, or the BGP routing license, and an ERGP writing license. Other switches are the providers that work out of the box without additional hidden fees.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches since 2005.

We have 1,500 end users.

I have only ever contacted Cisco support once in the time that I have been using it, but it was not related to the switches. Rather, I contacted them regarding Cisco ISE.

We started out with Cisco Linksys in 2006, now we are fully using Catalyst.

It was very easy to install. The last switch I implemented took me 15 minutes to install and set up a complete network.

We have 15 admins to manage this solution

We love Cisco, but the price is very prohibitive. We don't require any licensing, we scaled down to 2960.

I would not recommend using this solution in Africa.

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

We primarily use the solution for ethernet WAN connectivity, LAN connectivity, wireless, then integration with other third-party solutions. That's all we use it for, for the most part.

The solution is easy to use.

It is very stable and the performance has been very reliable. 

The installation process is fairly straightforward. 

Technical support has been helpful.

The solution should work to become more scalable. 

The price of the product is very expensive.

I've used the solution for a long time. It's likely been 15 years or more. It's well over a decade at this point. 

The stability is very good. The performance is great. It doesn't crash or freeze and there are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution is scalable enough. It could be better.

We have around 2,000 users on the switches currently.

Technical support has been good overall. We've been in touch in the past. They were helpful and responsive and we've been satisfied with them in general. 

We did not previously use a different solution. We've been using Cisco switches for a very long time. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. If I need to do a new deployment, for example, we just go to the store, get a new one, and install it. We have 40 right now. The installation is very easy.

Due to the fact that we have another of the Cisco products in our environment, Cisco Prime, it helps to deploy switches faster. It's very easy. It doesn't take much time to deploy.

We have five engineers that are able to handle any deployment or maintenance.

I was able to handle the implementation process myself. I did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant. 

We do find the cost to be quite high. They should work to lower it if possible. 

I would rate the product itself at a nine out of ten. It's been very good so far and we are satisfied with its capabilities. The cost is quite high, however. 

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

We use the solution for its switches. It's very similar to Dell or HPE - only much stronger. 

The product is very strong. It's much stronger than other options on the market, for example, Dell and HPE.

The software is excellent. 

Overall, the solution works very well and we don't have any real complaints in terms of its capabilities.

The product has been very stable and extremely reliable over the years.

You can scale the product quite well.

Technical support is always very helpful and fast to respond. 

The stability has been great over the years.

The product should work on its pricepoints. It's an expensive solution. It's the main complaint I hear from people.

At this point, I've been working with the solution for seven or eight years. It's been quite a while.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's very reliable. We've been happy with its performance and its stability.

The product can scale very well. When it comes to doing something like stacking - for example, stacking switches, of course, it is very simple to accomplish. It's very easy to stack two or more switches in order to expand the solution out. A company shouldn't have any issues with doing so. 

We have a client that has 800 users and up on the solution.

We do plan to continue to use the solution into the future.

Technial support responds quickly. They're very good at being timely. They also have a very good forum where you can ask your questions if you want to. 

Overall, it's very easy to get in touch with them and to find the answers you need to resolve issues. We're quite satisfied with eh level of support they provide to us. 

Veeam Backup and Replication High-Rated Course

https://bit.ly/2Ut3rVS

The initial setup is not too complex. It's pretty straightforward. For setting up the access layer, it takes about half an hour, which isn't that long. However, for the correlator - and that includes designing and drawing the map of the network and tasks such as that, it takes a few days.

We're actually consulting and doing a project for a state company in Tehran, for more than 800 switches. We can assist clients in the implementation process if they would like s to.

Veeam Backup and Replication High-Rated Course

https://bit.ly/2Ut3rVS

The solution is quite expensive. There are less expensive options on the market. The pricing can be a pain point for some companies.

I work often with the 3,000 and 4,000 series versions. It's not necessarily the latest version all the time.

I'd recommend this solution to other organizations.

Overall, we've been quite satisfied with their level of service. I would rate them ten out of ten. They've worked perfectly over the years.

The most valuable features include the redundancy one and the spanning tree. We also use the power over the ethernet. Moreover, we like the RRP, virtual redundant routing and GLBP, which are primarily on the Cisco Switches.

In the future it would be nice to see a dynamic VLAN database that's not managed by another, say, Cisco product.

I would like for Cisco to come up with an affordable dynamic VLAN solution. This would mainly serve the purpose of network access control. My thinking is along the lines of that of my colleagues, that there are non-Cisco infrastructures available which are more affordable. This would give us the option of using Cisco Catalyst or of moving on to the competition. 

Cisco ACI is a feature I would also like to see. When it comes to automation, it would be good to be able to use Ansible or Puppet to run one's network and enforce compliance. Roadmap is the way to go, especially when it comes to network engineers. I would be very pleased if Cisco were to enable its product to work with these automation tools. This is where the challenge lies in deployment for most network engineers. Automation is key. 

I have been working with Cisco Catalyst Switches for around 13 or 14 years.

The solution is very stable, durable and resilient. We had many issues in regards to other people and products and upgraded these solution so that they would be on par with Cisco.

I have not had to make use of direct technical support. Mainly I have taken advantage of the one which is online and this works very well for me. There are no issues to report. It has provided me with much assistance, especially the forum, and I would rate it as pretty good. 

We have worked with switches from other vendors, specifically SP and Ubiquiti. Then we worked with Cisco, as well. However, multiple infrastructure mainly applies to Cisco and this is in accordance with our enterprise standards. This means that we deploy Cisco for all sites that we take over.

When it comes to the access points side, we found Cisco to be a bit pricey and have utilized a different product that we combined with the Cisco switches. 

The pricing is on the high end. Recently, at the beginning of this year, we actually did a  comparison of Cisco and HP products. As far as I see it, given the same specifications and features, Cisco is comparatively expensive.

Cisco delivers when it comes to business value. So, I would advise others to go for it. But, they should be aware of budgetary considerations vis-a-vis the pricing. This is key. 

The product is one which delivers, especially as concerns large enterprise networks that put an emphasis on visibility and the time it takes for deployment and reaction to situations. Keeping this in mind, I would say that Cisco Analyst is the best for me. 

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches as an 8.5 out of ten. 

We are using 29 series. We have three switches that we use for common switches and routing. We also have a number of access switches that we interconnect to the devices in the network, such as telephone, CCTV. We have defined a number of VLANs that are running traffic between the switches, and we have done interconnections within the switches, cable, and fiber. 

It is very reliable.

Its price should be improved. It is very pricey. 

Its installation can be simplified. Its installation is a bit complex.

I have been using this solution for four or five years.

It is very stable.

It is very scalable. You can almost do any new thing that is coming. 

Our users will always be around 80 to 90 because the interconnections occur within the switches.

I've just been working on Cisco switches.

Cisco solutions are a bit complex to install. They are not easy, and they require training and knowledge. When we changed our switch, it took 30 minutes to one hour.

I installed it on my own, but most people prefer to hire a consultant.

It is very pricey. You have to pay for support.

I would recommend this solution. It is good. 

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of 10.

We use this solution as a network switch in banking and financial environments.

The most valuable features are performance, speed, and durability.

In an upcoming release, adding SD-WAN capabilities would be a big advantage for our company.

I have been using this solution for approximately 10 years.

We have found the stability very good in this solution.

The scalability is good.

We have licenses to have 24/7 technical support from Cisco directly. We have been satisfied with the support we have been receiving.

The price of this solution is reasonable.

In the future, we are going to implement the 2960-X next-generation version instead of this legacy solution we are using now which will have some added benefits.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.