Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

I have found the ease of configuration and troubleshooting, compared to those with other solutions, to be the most valuable.

The number of bugs that come up on Cisco Ethernet Switches can be reduced, and the stability can be improved, in particular with the recent iOS.

The scalability can be improved as well. Up to a certain network size, it is easy to scale, but after that, it becomes difficult.

I've been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for almost 12 years.

The stability of the recent iOS is not good, and every now and then, there are bugs.

The scalability is medium, that is, it's neither hard nor easy to scale.

Specifically, it is easy to scale up to a certain network size, but it becomes difficult beyond that.

The technical support is very good.

The initial setup is easy, and the whole switching fabric takes a lot less time to configure and be made ready for deployment.

The price of this solution is fair.

Cisco Ethernet Switches can be easily used at data centers and also at the enterprise level. However, if you're looking for a solution for a large scale deployment or for a large scale data center, then you should probably consider a different solution.

I would rate Cisco Ethernet Switches at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches for our data center, management center, and at our headquarters.

I'm satisfied with Cisco switches. It's stable and beautiful. 

Technical support could be better. Firmware upgrades should be better. We have an issue with upgrading the firmware. It's not upgradable. I think it should be easy to improve and upgrade the firmware.

Some of the powerboards could be better. I have about six models or six spots with Model 3550, and all of them have a defect in the powerboards.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for many years. I have many models, and some models are older than 20 years. They have worked up to now, and we have used the newest versions for about five years.

Technical support could be better. I think they take some long time to exchange a switch or replace it.

It's a little expensive.

I would tell potential users that they should use it if it's within their budget.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Ethernet Switches a nine.

We are using the solution as switches for our organization's network.

One main feature of this solution is the POE switches.

The interface and dashboard could look better.

I have been using the solution for approximately two years.

I have been using a lot of hardware that is probably close to 10 years old. We did have an issue once with one of our switches that would just auto-reset and wipe out and randomly restart. I do not know the full details, but we ended up just replacing it.

In the future, there should be readily available instructional videos.

The scalability is pretty good, all you need to do is add more racks. We have approximately 70 people that rely on this solution from my organization.

We paid for the technical support and they were good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I have been evaluating Fortinet solutions.

I rate Cisco Ethernet Switches an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in our data center or campus connectivity. We're using bridges to connect end-user devices and terminals.

The solution comes from a solid company that always offers good quality products. It's a real market leader in this area and can provide end-to-end solutions.  

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard.

The product offers very good customer support. It's likely the best in the industry.

There is very good distribution around the globe. 

The products are very reliable.

A single switch is very easy to manage.

Cisco doesn't do everything 100% perfect. There are competitors that have developed simpler and cheaper options, for example. The solution really should offer better pricing. It would help them stay competitive.

The product is a bit difficult to manage as there's a different management system now.

The network management system could be improved. 

I've worked with the solution for 25 years now. I've used it for decades. I have a wealth of experience with this product.

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

The product scales quite well. It works for any size organization. A company can also expand it out if they need to.

We have around 2,500 customers and half of them use Cisco.

Technical support is excellent. It's the best in the industry.

As an implementor, I've worked with a variety of solutions, including Aruba, Mellanox, Juniper, Ruckus, and more. I've worked with most of the vendors in the industry.

The initial setup is not overly complex. It's pretty straightforward. 

The deployment depends. It can take from a couple of minutes to a couple of months. It depends on the project and it depends on the size of the network.

How many people you need for the deployment depends on the size of the job. Some companies have their own on-site engineers.

The solution does not come cheap. It's quite pricey.

You do need a license in order to use the solution.

I work with the latest version of the solution. I'm an implementor and my company is a Cisco Gold partner.

I would recommend the solution to others. I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We are using Cisco Switches in a data center for access at the core level and the access level as well.

What I like the most is the performance and the latency that Cisco provides.

Once you have the Cisco box, you can put it in its place, switch it on and you can forget that it is there.

The GUI is not that easy. They need to work on the CLI, and to do that you have to have technical resources in-house if you want to do it yourself.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for approximately two years with this company. I have been using Cisco for two years, but in my entire career, I have been using Cisco for 15 years.

It's a stable solution. There are no issues with stability.

There are no limitations to scalability. It depends on what you choose. Once you choose the product you want then collaborate with getting that box which is important.

You need to know what your plan is two years in advance, and how you want to upgrade it. You will need to select the box as it is.

If you make your own selection, there may be an issue. Cisco provides many scalable options.

It has never been a case of getting support from Cisco directly. I have purchased Cisco from my vendor and receive 100% support. I have no issues with support in my city. From whatever vendor I purchase from, I get full support.

The initial setup is not too complex, but you will need to have technical resources if you want to configure it properly.

They are plug and play. You can just plug and start working with it, but in order to use the full features or basic features, you need some kind of technical expertise.

In Cisco, the GUI interface is not that easy. 

If you are not a technical person, you can install it, but you can't use it to its full potential. You will be working with a simple switch and for what you are paying, you won't be getting anything out of it, as it won't be configured properly.

The price could be reduced. Cisco is costly.

Price is a major concern with Cisco. Companies tend to move away from Cisco because the price is on the higher side. In addition to the fees being high, you pay for support which is also on the higher side.

Many companies tend to go with other options because of pricing.

We did a comparison between Cisco and Ruckus because we were looking at changing our wireless system.

We use Cisco, but have not used Ruckus before and wanted to evaluate which was better.

The PoC that was completed showed that Ruckus was more successful and useful than Cisco. Also, the cost of Cisco is much higher than Ruckus is.

When comparing cost, the ROI, and the cost of support, Cisco is way above Ruckus. We have decided that we will be changing to Ruckus.

I would 100% recommend Cisco Switches to others who are interested in using them.

Being an IT head, and running a data center, my top priority is to have zero down-time.

Once you have Cisco, your mind is at ease, there will be no issues.

If my rating is based on technical and functionality then I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. If you include the cost and the support then I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches as part of our network infrastructure at two different sites.

Cisco switches has helped provide efficient and stable switching in the organization. Once configured and setup right they work fine without any worries and has helped free up resources to concentrate on other tasks. 

I love the fact that they can be configured to do exactly what you need them to do, which in my opinion is what anyone with Cisco experience would enjoy doing. They can be set up and configured nicely.

Ease of configuration for none cisco experts would be an improvement.

Pricing can also do with some improvement to make it more competitive with competitor products with similar functionality.

We have been using cisco switches for over ten years.

This is a stable product.

Cisco switches are scalable. I manage two large sites and at the first site, we have about 200 people. The second site has about 300 people. We do not have any plan to expand, per se. I do have plans to upgrade the switches and probably redesign the environment for better efficiency. 

Cisco has a good technical support and I love they way the come in to help when you are doing a research on their site. I have not had any serious need for cisco technical support and so I would not be in the best position to give a conclusive evaluation of this but I must say they do a good job with their certifications so people would need very little of such services.  For a few minor challenges I was also able to get answers from the cisco forums. There is a pretty good database online for any conceivable problems one would face with the cisco switches.

We did not use a different solution prior to this, although we are going to be buying a few Meraki switches that we will add to our environment. We are going to test them to see how well they work with Cisco.

The initial set was complex. When I came into the project, the features were just put in with no consideration, whatsoever. This meant that I had to start from scratch to design the network, draw up the configurations and setup vlans to easily manage the network.

It was implemented in-house.

The price of the product is on the higher side, I feel you pay for the  name of the product as well but it's still manageable for corporate customers. Licensing is simple and straight forward which is something going well for cisco switches.

My advice is that if you are going to be implementing Cisco then you should at least have someone in the organization who is knowledgeable and can manage the features. The alternative is to use Meraki because they are easier to manage.

We have some pretty old switches in our environment and some of them are only 100 megabits. I would like to upgrade them all to at least one-gigabit.

Some of our uplinks are on ethernet, but I want to upgrade them to fiber to improve the performance.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for ethernet switches. We mainly use switches and routers as edge distribution switches. Some of the plants have been with the big pharmaceutical company Aragon. We have also been with a North American company, and others. Most of their switches were Cisco in pharmaceutical company where I worked for 10 years.

Some of the switches in the plants were used as a core. Many of them, especially in Bulgaria and in Europe, I installed myself. Others in America are responsible during the shift time for the configuration changes and so on. They are used in any level, as a Layer 3, Layer 2, whatever. All kinds of switches are used in the different places in our LAN. 

Cisco Ethernet Switches are great devices. I remember when we decided to replace all the HP switches from the American company when they acquired us. We replaced all the core switches with 3850, except in the bigger and biggest sites where we used the 4745 switches. That was great. They are very useful and very easy to configure. It was not much trouble at all and we got a more stable network.

We have been very satisfied with using Cisco 2960 series X with EIGRP Cisco proprietary protocol. This saved us much money and worked very stably.

We also installed 47 and 3850 Switches to the main servers on the 10-gig in some places and Nexus devices using 40-gig connectivity.

We are less in the Cloud because the Cloud technologies didn't work so well. That happened in all of the companies where I've been engaged.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for a few months in my current position but I would say 20 years or more in other companies.

The stability is great. Some Aruba devices are more stable, but with Cisco, we never had problems, with some little exceptions. It is very stable.

It is very scalable.

In this company we have a single usage. I first started with Cisco routers in 1997, now we install Cisco routers all the time.

The technical support for the core switches especially, but for the rest as well, is very good. It's excellent support. Especially for the core switches we had 24/7 support. On some sites in Bulgaria we one time had a problem at midnight and they delivered that switch in time. They brought the switch very fast. Very good, excellent, technical support solution.

Also, with previous accounts with the pharmaceutical company we had access to a dedicated engineer for the project. We had access to their WAP environment. So, all told, tech support is brilliant.

I have used Aruba which is very similar to Cisco. It is also easy to manage and to install. Installing it is straightforward but I don't have too much experience with the priority. We were responsible for their LAN but they have some special requirements which we didn't touch. We didn't use all functionalities in the Aruba. We just used them as Layer 2 switches or as access switches on the main site, and on the bigger sites they had still some old HP switches.

Also, if I remember correctly, Comware had all those old HP switches. We used Aruba just as Layer 2 access devices and didn't use much of the functionalities.

I prefer Cisco. Of course, Aruba is cheaper overall but not necessarily for those small Layer 2 device access switches. I don't know what the price is now, I didn't compare each comparable device. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cisco.

In terms of the initial setup, for me, with much experience, it's straightforward. With most of the switches we had a good team and prepared more than the configuration on the access sheet and then automatically generated the configuration file, just moved it to the note part, visually checking for a minute. Then copy, paste, and done. Start installing. Mounting and connecting. Straightforward.

It takes about one day for the device, if you don't count the cabling and the rack mounting and moving those and so on, and including the break, between 30 and 60 minutes, not more, for each switch. If they are stackable with some stack devices, for all of them, let's say an hour to hour and a half. Not more because we had all the configurations prepared in advance.

I you have a big client or if you have a big project and register it, the discount is good. In the companies that I have worked for, mostly for switching, we had a 55% discount or more. So with that good discount, who cares? It's cheap enough.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are appropriate for small and medium businesses. They also are large enough for our data centers which we had in Tel Aviv, Israel and in California. We had such big devices there.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Cisco Ethernet Switches a 10.

I would advise others who are looking into implementing Cisco to buy and implement it.

We primarily use the solution for our data center and edge switches. Like a lot of companies, we use (in the data center) core switches on Layer 3, and (on the edge) switches in Layer 2. 

Cisco as a whole is flexible. 

The solution can be configured to our specifications.

The solution allows you to monitor CPU utilization and memory usage.

You can only configure both switches and routers via the command-line. They should work to take on the newer HP and Aruba approach where you can configure from a URL or command line.

It could be useful if they developed the GUI interface to enable us to configure all features such as VLANs, port assignment, routing, DSP, through the GUI. That would make it easier for beginners. 

Cisco products are expensive compared to any other solution. Now, there are many competitors that give the same level of services - such as Juniper or Aruba.

We've been using this solution for about eight years. It's been a long time.

The solution is quite stable. Cisco offers very reliable products. All of their hardware is quite reliable.

The solution is quite scalable. However, the pricing is a concern. If I need to add switches, I tend to look at cheaper options like Juniper or HP.

In my organization, there were about 150 switches or more. That covered about 4,000 users and covered both wireless and LAN, wired and wireless.

We may not continue to use it, as it is expensive and there are alternatives.

There are many vendors in Egypt. Therefore, we can always find someone who can help us with technical support.

On top of that, we've found the website to be quite good in terms of finding documentation to help with troubleshooting.

We also use Aruba switches. I've used HP in the past as well.

Depending on the project for configuration, and considering deploying only one switch at a time, it may take about five minutes to handle one switch. Aruba, in contrast, might take ten minutes.  

We had about four people who handled the deployment.

The pricing of the solution is quite high. There are lots of comparable products out there that are nowhere near the cost. 

We're just customers and end-users.

We use Cisco switches at Layer 2 and Layer 3.

I wouldn't necessarily recommend Cisco to other organizations. After using HP, I found that they had just as good of a product with more features and better pricing.

In general, I would rate this product at a seven out of ten.