Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for our networking and security.

The solution provides good coverage and identity management. Additionally, the user interface is straightforward.

Overall the solution needs to have more time to mature.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN within the last 12 months.

Most of our customers are enterprise companies using this solution.

The initial setup is very easy.

The solution could improve the licensing structure and the price is expensive.

The subscription model needs to improve because when the subscription expires the solution stops working and you are not able to use the product. This needs to improve.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a six out of ten.

I do networking fit-outs for schools. I'm an advisor to about 30,000 schools.

The most valuable thing to me is the stability of the product.

I've been in the business 47 years, and I've been using Meraki for as long as they've been in business, which is about 14 years now.

I don't have an issue. It meets specifications.

I don't get involved on that end of it.

I don't get involved in the setup or installation.

The price could be slightly better, but then again, we negotiate deals every time so the market price isn't really relevant.

I would rate it eight out of 10.

We use the wireless network switches for wireless network communication as concerns our hotel. 

The solution should be more secure. 

It is overpriced and more expensive than Hauwei.

We've been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than two years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have had no problems with the technical support.

Prior to going with the solution, we used Ruckus.

The installation is fine. The solution is easy to install.

It took under five minutes.

Installation can be done on one's own. 

The solution is overly expensive. 

I would recommend the solution to others, unless the price would be competitive. 

We make use of 50 to 100 Meraki units.

I like Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, so I rate it as a six or seven out of ten. 

I haven't deployed it for myself. I have deployed it for customers. I work for a systems integrator.

We use it for Branch-type of installations where you have a small branch. You just need to manage it via the internet. You don't need a controller-type of environment there, for a small office-type of deployment.

It's a cheaper resource that helps manage a company's WiFi network.

The solution's ease of use is great.

The ease of management has been great.

The initial setup is easy.

The product has been very stable over the years. 

Technical support is okay.

The pricing is reasonable. 

Meraki is still very much a small office type of solution. It is not a fit for large enterprise networks, as it doesn't have tunneling functionalities. 

If you are configuring Meraki as a RADIUS client, you have to add individual 100 or whatever devices on the site as a RADIUS client. There is no RADIUS proxy option. Therefore, it is pretty much still a good use case for small networks, however, it's not a great use case for larger networks. 

The product needs to offer role-based access. 

I've been using the solution for more than ten years now. It's been a decade or so. I have quite a bit of experience with it.

The solution is very stable. As long as your internet links are stable, Meraki works perfectly fine. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Meraki is not a very scalable solution. It has its own limitations on the number of devices you can deploy. I would say it's not a very scalable solution.

I've contacted technical support a couple of times. They were okay. I didn't have any issues with them; they are fine.

I've used Cisco EROs, Cisco Meraki, Catalyst 9800, Aruba, and Instant Aruba, controller-based.

The initial setup is not complex or difficult. It's very straightforward. 

The pricing is okay. However, they don't have a perpetual license option. Regardless of what type of functionality a customer is looking for, they have to go for subscription-based licensing.

I'm a Cisco partner.

Meraki is a public cloud. With Meraki, you don't have a private cloud solution.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the product as a wireless solution. We only deal with wireless. 

The pricing of the solution is excellent. They tend to offer special pricing, which our clients appreciate.

The product is very reliable and offers great performance. Our clients never complain about it. It doesn't cause any problems.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

It's very easy to manage in the control panel. The option to manage and review the connection in the dashboard is very interesting. This is a very easy way to view the signal and it works online.  

The product works and offers a good connection for the users. 

This is just an option that customers can choose from. There's nothing that special about it. As a basic solution it does the job, however, I can't say it's fabulous.

The stability of the product is good. It doesn't crash or freeze and there are no bugs or glitches. It's a reliable solution.

We also work with Aruba and Ruckus. We offer all three to our clients and they tend to choose which one they want to work with, or which has the best price point for them.

The setup and onboarding process is fine. It's pretty straightforward. I wouldn't describe it as overly complex or difficult. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process. 

The pricing is pretty good. Customers don't seem to mind it. It's reasonable. 

We're partners and resellers.

It's important for us to present to our customer with some options. However, normally, our customers have a specific budget. In this case, we only move with the needs of our customers. In terms of Meraki, Ruckus, Aruba, et cetera, all work fine. We don't have problems. We don't have interference, or need a box reset, or face other kinds of problems.

Overall, I would rate the solution at a four out of ten.

We're using Meraki for our AP. We're also using Meraki for our SD-WAN.

The visibility of the site is most useful.

Its licensing can be better.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is pretty stable.

We have scaled it. There is no problem.

We have 230 users, and they don't even know that it exists.

It is straightforward and very easy. It is basically plug-and-play.

It is very quick. It probably takes more time to actually do the physical installation. 

I did one site myself. The rest were done by others. They were IT guys.

We have four people for deployment and maintenance. They are SMEs or system specialists.

Its price is okay for an enterprise. Its licensing is the most painful. If you hear anything bad about Cisco, it's about that. We're supposed to be one of the resellers but had to come back down to become a user. It's really bizarre.

We did evaluate other options. It was a long ago.

I would recommend this solution to others. I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight out of 10.

Its management is most valuable. It is the major feature of Meraki.

Integration with the corporate LAN where Catalyst products are installed is a major challenge.

I have been using this solution for the last seven or eight years. 

We cater to medium and enterprise companies. We have good experience in managing large networks. 

Because it is a part of Cisco, we are getting good support.

It is easy. Its ease is the main thing.

Its price is higher than other products. It is above the expectation of customers. So, every time we need to fight for a good price. 

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

I work for a system integrator company. I am in charge of approximately 15 people — I am head of the network department. We deal with many different companies, but Meraki and Cisco are the most popular. 

We have approximately 100 customers using this solution. 

The user interface is very simple and easy to use — our customers are very satisfied.

Meraki in general is easy to use. I recently hosted a webinar regarding SD-WAN. I compared  Cisco Meraki with other Cisco products. Meraki's performance is a little bit lower compared with other Cisco products, but the platform is very, very simple. As long as a customer has a dedicated IT team, then Meraki will be a good option for them.

There could be more functionality.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for a couple of years. 

This solution is both scalable and stable. 

We're a highlighted partner. If we have any questions, then we can go to the technical guys and get answers immediately. We get the best support all of the time.

The initial setup was straightforward. The platform is very simple. You have to install the EPs and put them on the virus controller so that you can fine-tune the different settings.

We typically install this solution for our customers. Still, if a customer wants to install it themselves, then they can do so easily.

Meraki and Aruba are available for almost exactly the same price. The price/benefit ratio is great. Meraki is more affordable than Aruba, HPE, and others.

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. 

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a rating of ten.
For small to medium-sized businesses, I think it's the best. 

I am a system integrator. I help integrate Meraki Solutions. 

We have customers with offices in Sri Lanka who have other small resorts globally. We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for the management and configuration without having to go to the site.

The most valuable feature of this solution is the application visibility, which is one of the main features.

We need more options for core switches. More switches with hardware capabilities that can be used at the core level. That would be very helpful.

It would be good to integrate with ISE in the future.

I have been integrating Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than five years.

I don't have any issues with the stability of the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

It's a scalable solution.

Most of our clients are enterprise companies.

Technical support is good but can be improved. I would rate them an eight out of ten. 

I am a design engineer. I work with Cisco Meraki, Aruba, Alcatel, and Ruckus.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I would say that they have adequate pricing.

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our campus environment.

The solution has worked very well in our campus environment. 

The solution has proven itself to be very stable so far.

The product is very easy to use.

The initial setup is very straightforward and easy.

We've found the connectivity to be excellent.

We would like the solution to work on the pricing of the solution. It would be ideal if it could bring the overall costs down.

We haven't even used the solution for a year yet. We've used it for about six months or so. It hasn't been that long just yet.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. It's been good so far.

The solution can scale quite well. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so fairly easily.

We currently use the solution in order to cover 500 users at our company.

Our company does plan to increase usage in the future.

Technical support has been fine. We've found them to be helpful and responsive. We're satisfied with the level of support we receive.

The installation was very straightforward, from what I recall. A company shouldn't have any trouble with the initial setup. It's not overly complex or difficult. 

The deployment is pretty fast. It only took us about two hours or so. 

We did not need the assistance of a consultant or integrator. We handled the initial implementation ourselves. We handled it in-house.

The pricing could be cheaper. It's the one pain point.

We pay a monthly fee.

We are using the latest version of the solution. I can't speak to the actual version number.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. We haven't used it for that long, however, we have been quite satisfied with its overall capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations and users.