Meraki MS Switches Reviews

We have computers around the school, but we've been cutting down on desktop computers and moving more towards Wi-Fi and laptops. In the dorms, we still have a docking station which is wired, so it's a mixture. The plan is to run everything through the Meraki system, so we can access it and we can control it, whether we are inside the school or outside the school.

As Meraki MS Switches are accessible, we benefit from them as it's quicker for us to identify problems and find solutions, which means the downtime is reduced.

Accessibility is what I find most valuable in Meraki MS Switches, because I'm able to check things and see if they're working, without being on-site at all times. I can, for example, travel across the country, yet I can still check on how things are working, or what's not working. I can figure out what's the problem, what's the solution, and I can fix the problem, even when I'm not on-site. Easy access to these switches has been a great help.

What could be improved in this product is the price. It could be cheaper.

Gaining a deeper access or deeper understanding of certain things, and being able to look further into the workings of Meraki MS Switches, is something I'd like in the next release.

Having bundles in relation to price would also work perfectly for us.

We've been using Meraki MS Switches for three years.

I find this product stable. It's very reliable. We've only had two or three instances when one of the two Wi-Fi systems in our school fluctuated, but I'm not certain what really caused it. It has been relatively easy to fix that, and it could just be a configuration problem.

I don't see any problems with scaling Meraki MS Switches at the moment, but I will know more about it once we have replaced our old switches with this product. It's only then that I'll have a better understanding of its scalability in terms of it being a whole system, rather than individually.

We used Cisco switches, then we decided to go with Meraki MS Switches for several reasons. One reason was that the Cisco switches were originally set up by a company that was in charge of the whole system, which was run from a company outside the school. Then, we had someone come in to take charge here in our school, then we transferred that responsibility to an outsider. I then came in, and I started learning the system, so the outsider became the backup plan. 

It turned out, once we started digging into things, that the system was set up in a cumbersome and closed way, much like a banking system, rather than a setup that would be good for a school, that can rely on switches rather than closing the school into units.

Another reason was that our switches were getting outdated, so we had to do something. We started looking at various solutions, and we had to decided whether to continue the way we were doing things, which we did not like because it was cumbersome and it had to be done on-site, or if we could do it in a way that would be more accessible both inside and outside the school, while having the level of security and stability we need.

For example, we looked at Ubiquiti UniFi which was a cheaper system, but it was less stable, though I know that some schools were using that system. It was really just a question of stability and accessibility, and these were deciding factors in the system that we chose. Even though Meraki MS Switches were more expensive than the other solutions, we ended up with Meraki.

Product setup wasn't complex. I was very surprised about how easy it was to set up.

We implemented this product in-house, with the help of the head of our IT team.

This product is pricey. We are a relatively low-budget school, and for a low-budget school to have a system like this, which is a great help, it means that instead of being able to move faster towards implementing everything, we need to take very small steps. What we should be able to do in two or three years, would take us five to seven years, so the price is a drawback.

Not only do we have to buy the product, we also have to get a license for each annually. For a school that doesn't have a lot of money, that is a problem, but we still decided to go with Meraki MS Switches.

We evaluated Cisco, Fortinet, and Ubiquiti UniFi switches.

We ended up with Meraki Wireless, so we never got to use Fortinet, but we are happy with what we have. As of last summer, the state has taken charge of security issues, so we just follow them.

We set up a new firewall three years ago, and we went with Cisco Meraki firewall. We used to have Cisco and after having looked at various options, we decided on Meraki. The head of school made that decision, because he was advised that even though Meraki's a bit pricey, it's still secure and offers a high level of accessibility to us who are looking after the system, and making sure that everything's working fine. That has turned out to be rather true, because Cisco Meraki firewall has the level of security we are looking for, with the accessibility to implement all the changes we needed to do, and the access to the end points as we needed them.

Since we have a Meraki firewall, it goes through the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, and the rest of the school really just has switches that will be replaced with Meraki MS Switches as time goes by.

I'm unsure about what version of Meraki MS Switches we're using, but it could be the most up-to-date version. It's deployed in the Cloud, so we access the website and control everything through there. The hardware is in the building, but there isn't any specific need to access the hardware, except for the old Cisco switches that we still have which need to be accessed locally. Once we've replaced all the old switches with Meraki MS Switches, which will take us a few years, then we should be able to access everything through the cloud.

The deployment of this product took less than a day, particularly a few hours. The head of our IT team helped set it up, and it was plug and play. We plugged it in, set up the ports, and made sure that everything was working. The product worked fine. There were a few issues to begin with, but those had to do with conflicts between Cisco switches and Meraki switches, because even if they were from the same company, they were still different sets of products. That was really the only thing that took a little time to figure out.

We have 850 users of Meraki MS Switches in our school. We only have two people for its deployment and maintenance. I'm the one who handles it full time, and when I run into problems, I talk to the other guy, then he jumps in. That's all we need to maintain this product. It's being used everyday, e.g. we open up at 8 a.m. and we close at 4 p.m. We use these switches constantly, throughout the whole day. I also use this product when I'm working from home, as I'm also connected to the Meraki system.

We didn't have the need to contact technical support for Meraki MS Switches, so I can't evaluate their support.

My advice to people thinking about implementing this product is to look at the price tag, because in the end, the price will always be a big factor, especially when you have a system, then you buy the hardware, then you need to pay the license for each product annually, as the costs will mount up the more machinery you add in.

I would also tell them the same thing I always advise people when they're buying a computer, and that is to ask themselves what they need. Do you need a secure system, but is not very stable? This is highly unlikely, in my opinion. Do you need a stable system that is very accessible, both inside and outside of a school or a building? What is it you need?

I would tell them from that point, look at accessibility, reliability, stability, security, and look at all the systems that are available. There are at least four or five big names all around. Have a look at them all, and don't just jump on the first one. We all have our preferences, so just keep an open mind, have a look at the different options. For example, I commented about Fortinet this one time, that I like that system, and I think it's a very interesting system, but we decided on Meraki MS Switches and I'm happy with this product.

There's a return on investment because this product is worth it. It's so accessible, stable, and secure, and because it's so accessible, it's quicker for us to find solutions. Meraki MS Switches make things run more smoothly, making these switches almost priceless.

I'm rating Meraki MS Switches a nine, because I'm very happy with them, but I'm very skeptical about giving a ten out of ten. Nothing is perfect.

I am primarily focused on the Catalyst wireless port portfolio and the switching portfolio, which includes the 9200, 9300, and 9500 series, among others. I also work with Meraki, including the Meraki MX firewall, MS switches, and Microsoft products, among others.

Almost all of my functions perform very well. I don't require anything else. It is very good in the management console, which is managed through a single dashboard. That's why I mostly recommend Meraki for small setups and remote office locations for clients using MS language.

The prices are a little higher than other vendors. However, within the Cisco customer segment, customers mostly recommend it because they are existing users, and they are satisfied with their current usage.

I have been using this solution for the last three years.

If there are many users and a heavy data load, heavy data traffic, I am not suggesting Meraki. I am focusing on Meraki Catalyst for live usage. It is not scalable enough, and I do not recommend it due to its switching capability.

I receive support directly from a Meraki dashboard. The support is excellent and rated ten out of ten.

Positive

I have mostly been using Cisco for the last 15 years. I do not work with other vendors. For switching portfolios, I focus solely on Cisco.

The initial setup was straightforward, especially with the API setup. I simply go to the dashboard, insert a dashboard license key, and add a device. I can then see their GUI-based dashboard and configure it according to my requirements. For single fleets, the setup usually takes 30 to 60 minutes.

I have a technical team for the installation part. They manage our technical communication well.

I am very satisfied. The investments made are justified by the satisfaction with the Mediatek solution.

Local Meraki support is excellent. They assist on each and every deal, especially regarding the size of BOQs. 

I would rate the overall solution ten out of ten.

My company currently has about a dozen switches in operation in multiple locations. We've got probably about four or five of them in our main headquarters, then we've also rolled out to individual sites to utilize them. We remove the Cisco router and go directly into what we currently have as an SD-WAN solution.

Updates are easier to administrate. Security is handled in real time updates.

Overall a great solution.

The most valuable features are the cloud and throughput visibility, the ease of configuration, and being able to implement them into our umbrella DNS solution.

As far as the downside, I would say that they're not data center ideal. They're definitely missing some of the higher end data center Cisco features, but I'm sure those are coming down the road. Probably the only other downside I see to these is that they're very limited in their GUI for the initial configuration. 

3 Years

So far, I have not seen any of the switches go down. 

I think the only downside that I've seen so far in the scalability of the product is that they don't have anything that's more than a 48-port switch. They're more useful as access switches than as core switches for large environments. I mean, you can stack them nicely, but I haven't seen anything like a blade switch. It's different from what we standardized on in the past, with the Cisco 6500 or the 4000 series blade switches.

The support has always been really good. 

This product is very straightforward. They're a little bit of a change from the standard Cisco gear, but if you understand the networking and how things work, they're pretty simple to set up.

We have the switches on the cloud, so we can centrally administer updates from the cloud pretty simply. It's nice in that respect because you don't have to have hands-on maintenance. 

Everybody would love for the pricing to be cheaper than it is, but I don't know if that's a legitimate ask.

It's $150 per year for licensing on each 250 switch. The 425 switches are about $500 a year for the enhanced enterprise licenses. 

My advice to those looking at implementing the product would be to understand how to get into the console before implementing the switches because, in a secure environment, they may not be able to call back initially without a little bit of configuration. However, if you have broadband with DHCP, it's simple to get the initial configuration downloaded.

I would rate this solution as an eight out of ten. If they had a little bit more advanced features, I'd raise them up, but they're real good.

We can build virtual stacking for the switches. It helps manage multiple switches deployed in different locations with a single console on the cloud. If we make any configuration changes, it can be changed across all the features using it.

It is a cloud-based product and depends on internet connectivity. It is not limited to specific geographical areas as well. So, we cannot provide these switches in the BFSI segment, especially the banking sector, as they have certain limitations due to regulatory guidelines. 

They could add NAS encryption protocol to the switches. Nowadays, many customers enquire about this feature.

We have been using Meraki MS Switches for almost eight years.

Stability-wise, I rate the product as a nine out of ten.

We have seven to eight customers for Meraki MS Switches from the manufacturing sector. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

The product's technical support team needs to take ownership of the problems. There is always room for improvement.

Neutral

I am working with many product competitors like Ruckus, HP, Juniper, etc.

We have implemented the product in Cisco cloud infrastructure itself. It is a private cloud based on a public cloud setup like AWS, Azure, or Google. It provides connectivity to the devices through the internet via a terminal. We require two people to manage the entire setup for maintenance.

The product's licensing cost is about 30% to 40% of the hardware cost. We have a yearly subscription. All the features are bundled in the licensing component. There are no additional costs involved.

It is one of the best products. It has a very good dashboard and a straightforward configuration. Although, it is not compliant with the requirements of specific industries that want to set it up within a particular region or country. In such cases, we provide them with on-premise solutions.

I recommend it to others and rate it a seven out of ten.

We are using the Meraki MS120, MS425, and MS355 switches. We currently have a mixed environment with Cisco switches as well as these Meraki switches. We're replacing them one by one to see how well they perform. So far, we have only configured the MS120, which are the eight-port switches. We have some poor equipment, so we are replacing the existing switches. There are fewer network ports that are required, so we've set up these first.  

 We haven't yet finished setting up the MS425. They're supposed to work as the core of our network, replacing the 38 switches that we have on the core. They haven't been configured on the network. We're still trying to just do tests and see if they will work. The MS355 are supposed to be on the distribution, so we haven't configured those, either.

These switches are not expensive and their configuration is very easy. You can provision them on the dashboard, then you just connect them to everything. It picks up from there. Management is easy.

I wouldn't say I'm in a position to talk about any improvements because I'm still learning. We're still on the learning curve, so we have not implemented a lot of the things that we can do with the other switches. But I'm sure that maybe during the course of the next month or two, we'll be able to replace enough of these switches to see how well they work.

We've only been using Meraki MS Switches for about a month or so.

So far, it's been very stable. They run with no issues.

It is scalable.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not complex at all. It's much easier than the Leader switches we've had to configure that required us to learn some commands and so forth. 

The pricing is good especially if you have a tight budget, and you want to implement these. But I guess some people would have some reservations about the yearly subscription.  Maybe they could offer an option of having a one-off or perpetual license to let people test it and see how it goes. 

And then I'm not sure about the compatibility with other models because I haven't tried them to see if they work with other switching models. But I do know that they work with Cisco. With other brands, I don't know.

I would rate it an 8.5 out of 10. 

I've got the appliances and I've got the switches and I've got the access points.

I have switches for the phones and the access points. I have standard switches for the network. However, I'm doing the layer-two switching. I don't do any additional programming on them. The advantage that I have with them is the user portal. I can find the endpoints by port. Therefore, if I need to control it, I can do it from the portal and shut a port down, however, I don't do any additional programming beyond layer two.

I like that I can patch and manage them remotely from the user portal. It's easy to patch and manage from anywhere.

The initial setup is easy.

I don't see any need for any improvements for my particular use case. 

They could lower the price.

At my latest company, we've used the solution for three years. However, I've worked with the product for seven years. 

In terms of stability. they're as good as any other switches I've used. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

I don't know that you scale switches. You get them for whatever amount of ports they're on.

I have sites with 24 port switches and I have sites with 48 port switches. Their size is growing to meet the needs we have.

Before this, I had HP and Cisco and was actively buying HP switches. We switched, not that it is cheaper. I am required in our industry to always be on the current firmware. That would, in the past, require either working late hours or scheduling downtime to do those updates. Now I can schedule them for any time of the day in the off hours. It happens automatically. There wasn't much difference between any of the switches. 

It's a straightforward implementation. 

I just did plug-and-play.

I can maintain them from my desk. I'm a one-person shop. They are very easy to take care of.

For example, I can schedule patch management. The biggest concern is keeping them patched or updated so that the firmware is always current to avoid potential bad players or issues. I can schedule that and do that all from the console. I don't have to worry about staying up late at night to do it or taking it down in the middle of the day and scheduling downtime. In the middle of the night, I can say, "Patch it," and it'll be done.

The pricing is high and could be reduced. 

The initial cost is above HP and probably comparable to Cisco. HP, on their switches, still has a limited lifetime warranty. You buy it and you'll get support and replacement for the life of the switch. The maintenance on the Meraki is not that great. I buy it three years at a time. It's not a big number.

Visibility is part of the Meraki mindset or the culture. You manage your infrastructure from a single portal. I have visibility into what's going on from a single portal, and I can manage and update and maintain it from that single portal. I don't have to have multiple solutions. I don't have to log into the switches. Everything's managed from that single portal. It's great.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. 

I am using MX400, MS320, MX250, and MS250. We also used MX64 before. We have replaced it with MX67.

The solution is efficient and easy to run.

The product has no CLI. The solution must provide a command line interface like the one in the Cisco environment with a proper iOS interrogation ability. It's the biggest thing for me because we don't know what these devices are doing half the time. It takes a long time to know we've committed a configuration change in Meraki. Sometimes, we have to wait for long before anything happens.

I have been using the solution for at least five years.

We have also used Cisco routers. They were plugged into NETGEAR Switches in our branches throughout the country. However, my organization wanted more visibility and the ability for our first-line support to do things rather than needing a higher technical level. So, we switched to Meraki.

The tool is expensive.

I will recommend the tool to an organization depending on its needs. It is a convenient product. Overall, I rate the product an eight out of ten.

Meraki is a cloud-based solution that can be accelerated to clients and compensate for the entire gamut of networking, switching, wireless, and gateway security. Everything can be managed and monitored from the cloud. It's a multidimensional scenario where clients might have many locations and need infrastructure to be deployed quickly and remotely. If there's no local manpower available at those sites, then these are the ideal use cases for Meraki.

For me, management and security is the most valuable feature. Moreover, Meraki has a beautiful management console from where you can manage the entire solution.

From an enterprise level, too, their pricing is reasonable. Being the Cisco umbrella, they are on the higher end but pretty okay.

The challenge we face, not only with Meraki but maybe with all vendors, is the delivery timeline because of our global issues. There is a lead time issue that we are facing, specifically on the Cisco or Meraki. If Cisco can work on something with better lead times, they could regain the edge they lost due to delivery delays that have happened for the last two years.

If it's a greenfield kind of opportunity, Meraki does make sense. But, if they can look at opening up a bit of their management portfolio to other vendors, too, maybe it will be more useful because many clients might already have some solutions as part of their environment. In case they have a few switches of some other brand, Fortinet, or they could have switches from HP. If Meraki can also address this point of managing those components as part of their cloud offering, that will help the future upgrade.

There is definitely room for improvement in the delivery lead time. In case someone wants to procure something new, inherently, Cisco was having a challenge even for Cisco hardware to get all the components. Even now, as we see, the delivery lead time is close to four to five months. Clients are not ready to wait for five months for a business to start. They want it immediately. They placed the order today, and in another two to three weeks, they need the hardware.

I have been using this solution for eight years.

Stability had some issues early on, but now it's more or less stable. I have not received many complaints from clients using the Meraki MS Switches. It's pretty okay now and has reached that level of stability.

It is a scalable solution. It's a cloud-based solution, so you can add as many devices as you want.

Initially, there were some challenges related to dependencies. However, since Cisco TAC has taken over, I have noticed a significant improvement in the speed at which issues are resolved. The call is now diverted to the same tag, which has made the process faster and more efficient.

The initial setup is fine. The device is manageable console-wise and has a user-friendly GUI.

When it comes to implementation, it's just a matter of plug-in and start working. A branch could be up and running in half an hour, provided the necessary parameters are set and available.

Meraki MS Switches is neither too expensive nor too cheap, but yes, opex-wise, Meraki is not too cheap. Again, if you want me to rate it on a scale of zero to ten, with ten being the most expensive, I would rate Meraki around six and a half.

Price can be better because if there are other offerings in the market, they are also scaling up, gearing up, and giving most of the functionality similar to what Meraki is able to give. To be competitive in the market, it's better that some pre-thinking can be done from the pricing front too.

The pricing model is based on a yearly renewal because everybody is in the subscription world. But we generally ask clients to go for a three-year upfront purchase. Then, after every three years, they need to renew.

Depending on the customer's overall solution, we also work with other networking components, such as Fortinet and other cybersecurity solutions.

If it's a single-location kind of environment, definitely, you have got other options to look at. But if you have a multi-site kind of environment and you need all inherent functionalities starting off from the basic networking, going on to security, and going on to your SD-WAN and other functionalities to be part of the same solution, then it's the right solution that you can look at because it has all these as part of the inherent OS itself. And the biggest benefit that you get is that it is manageable. It's a cloud-based offering, and you can very well manage the entire setup without even being at the site, provided that the environment is on the network.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten.