Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

We have them set up for customers, including SMB, Kindergarten through grade 12 schools, higher education organizations, and some enterprises. It's pretty much been used for everything except the federal government.

The Cisco software does everything under one umbrella better than the competition. HP kind of has the capability. I'm not sure if they still have it, however, they used to license Cisco's iOS software for their own switches, which were decent switches as well. Now, there's Aruba, however, they've been through a bunch of different changes over the years. ThreeCom was part of HP for a while. In any case, Cisco offers sort of a one-stop-shop of options.

It's all-encompassing and can help you in all these different areas. If people realize that they want something that's going to work, that's pretty foolproof, then Cisco's always worth the investment.

The initial setup has gotten easier over the years.

The stability is excellent.

The solution is very scalable.

Technical support is quite helpful and responsive. 

The thing that people usually complain about is that they're a little bit more expensive than other options. That said, you get what you pay for and it's such a good solution.

You do have to buy into the Cisco architecture to be able to use them.

You have to make sure you size appropriately at the outset. They're for the smaller markets usually, and you just want to make sure you don't purchase something under what you might grow to. Users should try to think a little bit bigger than what they want just so that they can have extra ports if they need them, instead of having to buy another one quicker than expected.

Our company has worked with Cisco probably for more than 20 years. The company is 31 years old, and we've actually always worked with Cisco Switches since the beginning. We have the same master engineer that has been with us for probably 28 of the 30 years. He's always been working with that.

The solution is very stable. That's one of the main benefits of it. It's super stable, and it's been proven for years.

They've got many solutions for small companies, which we work with, and some of our biggest customers, and even multinationals can use Cisco probably better than anybody else. That's why the fact that international community likes it so much. They can use it anywhere in the world in companies of any size. It scales very well.

Technical support is usually very good. You're paying for the best, so the tech support is really good as well. We are quite satisfied with the level of service provided. 

We also have experience with solutions such as Juniper, Aruba, and Ruckus. 

If the people want to save some money, they'll go with a Ruckus switch or something else as it's less expensive. With Cisco, it has you covered, however, it's a little bit more expensive, and if you don't like the fact that it's got the closed infrastructure, it's a closed architecture, you're not going to mix and match it with switches from other companies.

In terms of the initial setup, I'm never really involved in it. It's our engineers that do that. It's a definite effort to get everything set up and working correctly. It's not just out of the box, however, these days they've all gotten so much better. The Cisco products of today would be much easier to put together than the ones in the past.

The pricing is high. It's expensive, however, you get what you pay for and it is an excellent solution.

I would advise new users to work with a reseller that has a good history of working with Cisco and that can do a good game plan upfront with what your actual long-term goals and needs will be.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. The product is excellent, however, nothing is perfect, which is why I haven't rated it at a perfect ten. There are always ways to improve.

Our datacenter is built using Cisco switches. We use Cisco products for wireless access, routing, and switching.

Cisco switches have helped our organization through good connectivity speeds and stability. In particular, it has improved our wireless capabilities.

The most valuable feature is the after-sales support. I like their after-sales support more than anything because it's very good.

The sales experience was good because we deal with Cisco directly and then buy through the partners. It means that we developed a close relationship with Cisco in the process.

Cisco has been adding things on top of their devices, like DNA, which makes managing them very easy.

For people who are new, the interface can be confusing. For me, however, I don't think that there's anything that can be simplified because I'm used to the command line and the old way of working with Cisco switches. I find them simple.

We have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for between 15 and 16 years, since 2004.

This is a very stable product that we have barely had issues with.

This is a very scalable solution. When we started, we didn't have enough switches and other equipment. One of the beauties is that when we add new technologies or buy new switches, it scales.

We are in a university setting and there are new students every year, so we always have to connect more people to our network. It is definitely scalable and we plan to increase our usage in the future.

The technical support is very good.

I have worked with products from Juniper, HP, and many other vendors that have switching products. Cisco is the best, not necessarily the team, but the after-sale support.

In some places I have been, they were using other brands. Based on their experience after I introduced them to Cisco, they stuck with it because of the support.

I completed the Cisco training in 2008 and from there, the initial setup was simple.

Cisco products are not cheap, which is something that can be improved.

There used to be a problem with programmability, but with the release of the new switches, I don't think that there's anything that needs to be added.

I would recommend them any day.

My advice for anybody who is considering this type of product is that when you buy a Cisco device, you don't just buy the device but the whole organization. Cisco will get people to assist you when you've got an issue, and they will make sure that you get that support. They have the best after-sales support that I have ever worked with.

I would rate this solution a ten out of 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.

Generally, we use the product just to switch traffic.

They just work. Their reliability has been great for our organization.

We just need them to run. There's not any feature that we sought out and we bought them. We bought them due to the fact that we needed switching capabilities and Cisco is pretty reliable.

The solution can scale.

Technical support is helpful and responsive.

They can make the licensing model a little easier. I know they've made some recent changes, it's a little confusing. It's more complicated than it once was.

I've been using Cisco switches for 20 years. It's been a very long time.

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

They're doing the job fine. We have upgraded them when we needed to. We can scale as necessary.

I can't speak to how many users are currently on our switches.

Tech support has always been good. They are helpful and responsive. I'm quite satisfied with their level of service.

We also use Aruba switches and Dell PowerConnect.

The implementation process has a moderate level of difficulty. It's not straightforward or complex; it's somewhere in the middle. Sometimes they change the iOS around, and that lends itself to a bit of complexity. You have to work on updating items.

There were a couple of versions early on where we buy a different model switch and the operating system was different, with different commands and stuff.

We didn't really have a specific implementation strategy.

Initially, some of the switches took about an hour to implement.

I take care of the maintenance aspects of the product. You don't need a lot of people to do it.

Occasionally, we've gotten outside help when we've needed it, however, most of the time I take care of that myself.

When we have gotten outside help, the experience has always been positive.

I haven't specifically witnessed any ROI while using this solution.

The licensing model is difficult to understand.

We get the SMARTnet and one of the switches has that Cisco ONE licensing. It's probably running about $12,000 a year right now. There aren't any add-on costs on top of that that I am aware of.

We're just customers and end-users.

We've had several versions over the years, mostly Catalyst switches.

It's just a really solid product. I'd give the product a rating of eight out of ten as they are really good switches.

We use Cisco as a business switch on a small network of about 30 users. We use it for internet sharing, as centralized management for the network and active directories, as a domain controller, and for file sharing.

This product provides us with stable security and configurable VLAN management.

The most valuable part of this solution for us VLAN (Virtual Local Area Network), MAC authentication and security.

For Cisco, the interface between fiscal small business switches and the Cisco Catalyst or Enterprise switch is a little bit different. So, I needed to take some time to understand how this will impact the network if we plan to scale it in the future and to learn the different interfaces. I think it would be better for Cisco to unify the interfaces between their products. It might make it easier for users to use different models concurrently as different versions of switches and improve scalability.

It is not really a feature of the solution itself, but I also think that the technical support directly from the company should be better in the area of handling integrations.

I am very satisfied with the stability. We have not suffered any stability issues with the product being unstable on the network and it is not difficult to support. It is a very rare thing to have something happen that is related to the stability of the product.

Once you understand how the product works, it is easy to configure. I do not see any significant limitation on the scalability of the product so long as you have chosen the right product for use in your environment.

In most cases when I need to solve an issue, I search for a solution on Google and in the internet communities. I usually find what I need there. So mostly I don't need any help from support.

When I contact support, most of the time they provide good information and they are helpful, but sometimes they will not help. The problem is with acknowledging the need for integration support. If you call about integration between products, they might say something like "this is Cisco and we do not support this other product, we are supporting only Cisco products." Cisco is not the solution for everything, and they must know that the product integrates or gets integrated into a network. They are aware of that and should have the experience to help users integrate products when their product is involved. 

So, overall I'm satisfied with technical support if I call with an issue that is related only to the Cisco product, but sometimes I'm not satisfied when an issue is related to integrating or connecting with other products.

Technical support could be better in this way.

As I moved around between three or four companies to get better jobs and positions, all of them were using Cisco. In some places, we were using HP ProCurve switches. Having that experience previously is the reason why we went with Cisco for the network at this company. It costs more, yet we get a stable product with the most features. Cisco is more reliable, especially in a critical environment.

For small networks, the initial setup is straightforward. You can simply connect the product to the network and it would work. But the configuration for VLANs, to configure specific ports, and to configure security, the product has a little different interface than other Cisco solutions. So the first time setup it easy. You just have to connect and it is plug-and-play. But the difference in the interface between models makes it harder to understand the version and adapt to the differences from the other types of Cisco switches. If the interface had been the same, it would have been very quick to set up.

Actually, I did the deployment by myself. I didn't need any help or support from the vendors. If I do ever need help, I usually go to the internet and use the community and forums. In extreme cases — and very rarely — I contact the vendor directly. 

It is certainly not the least expensive product for switching, but I think it is the best and if you have the budget it is worth it.

I evaluated other options by my previous experience, so, in a way, we did evaluate other choices, but I had already made up my mind because of what I knew.

Cisco is the better solution if someone is considering it and they are willing to pay for it. The product is expensive to buy. In my current position, the budget is not a problem. If other people are in a similar situation where they can afford Cisco, I recommend Cisco. If they do not have a big budget and they need to be more budget-minded, I can recommend the HP ProCurve (now HP Networking) and D-links (Ethernet Switches) as my first choice for less expensive options.

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Cisco ethernet switches as an eight. It is not a ten because of the differences in the interface and the quality of integration support with other products.

We have a local network and we have four Cisco Ethernet Switches that have 48 ports.

The management of the solution could improve.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are stable.

The solution is scalable.

Cisco technical support is good. We have a better experience because we have local support when we have some technical problems. The team support is very good.

The setup of the solution is easy.

The price of Cisco Ethernet Switches here in India is too high. There are other cheaper solutions available.

Our management has decided we should look into other solutions, and we are currently evaluating Juniper switches. We are checking the performance of the solution.

Cisco products are good, but nowadays technology is changing, some other products are available in the market. We are checking some different products available. I'll see how the performance is and how it works on the network.

I rate Cisco Ethernet Switches a nine out of ten.

We find that, mainly, stability is the solution's most valuable aspect. We normally don't have problems with the Cisco Switches. 

The ease of use is also great. It's very easy to work with and navigate.

The installation is very straightforward. You can likely handle it in-house.

The scalability is very good.

We've used technical support in the past and they've been very helpful.

Pricing is always an issue when you compare Cisco to other vendors. Cisco could definitely work on delivering improved pricing to its customers.

I've been using the solution for about ten years now. It's been about a decade. We've used it for a while.

The stability is great. Cisco is very reliable and the performance is good. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze.

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

We have about 1,300 users on the product currently.

You can raise a ticket via the solution's technical support. I have done that before. I've found them to be very good. They are helpful and responsive in general.

I've worked with other networking equipment such as Aruba, Ruckus, Huawei, and even MikroTik.

We have found the initial setup to be very easy and very straightforward. It's not too complex or overly difficult. A company shouldn't have any issues handling the process. Its implementation is quick as well. It is just a couple of minutes for the initial configuration of the circuit.

We have a team of four that can handle any deployment or maintenance tasks. They are mainly systems admins and engineers.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need the assistance of an integrator or consultant at all.

The product is not cheap. It's quite expensive when you look at it as compared to other options on the market.

You have to pay for smart account licensing when you use this product.

We're customers and end-users. I personally do not have a business relationship with Cisco.

Currently, I'm running an iteration of Cisco IOS 15.0 on 2960 Switches.

In general, we've been quite happy with the solution and I'd rate it at a nine out of ten overall.

I'd recommend the solution to other users. It's a very good product, however, sometimes, it can be expensive.