Meraki MS Switches Reviews

We primarily used the solution as a switch.

The product offered a lower CapEx cost for the appliance. That's why they tried that infrastructure.

It was easy to set up.

We didn’t like the performance, which is why we ended up stopping usage.

We had issues with the stability, issues with the pricing, and the total cost of ownership.

The feature set is less attractive than other or similar equipment from other companies.

You can’t really scale the solution.

We’d like to have on-premises management in the future versions of the product.

It would be great if there were industrial protocols with more on them for an IT environment.

We’ve used the solution since 2018.

We faced some stability issues when using the product.

It’s not a very scalable product.

It’s used for energy generation, and we only really need 5% of our team managing it, so it doesn’t really require that many users per se.

I recall technical support being good. They were pretty helpful and responsive.

We used Cisco switches, among other options.

The solution was relatively easy to deploy. It was straightforward and not overly complex.

The deployment itself only took a couple of hours.

You only need one person to handle the deployment tasks.

We used an integrator. They helped us manage the initial setup.

We’ve removed all of the switches. We didn’t really witness an ROI.

In the long term, we likely did not get any ROI as we had to buy the switch. We should have bought it a couple of years ago. At this moment, it was a good return on investment in the sense that we had a switch working. However, it was not doing everything we wanted, yet we had it quickly working for low pricing. In the beginning, it seemed reasonable; however, in the end, it was not, as we have to replace everything.

The solution offered low Cap-Ex pricing.

However, it ended up being expensive. We purchase dit as a package from an integrator. There were some extra fees, for example, for maintenance.

We didn’t really evaluate any other options. A company approached us about the product, and we decided to try it out.

We are currently removing our Meraki switches. I’m not sure which version we were using. The latest was likely MS 120. We replaced the switches with others, and we’re bringing in ways to interconnect with other systems, which was providing us with more stability.

I’d rate the solution a four out of ten and advise potential users to go with a different product.

We are partners of Meraki and operate as a service provider for Meraki switches, notably the Meraki MS Series 410, 420, and 450. Our responsibility is to help customers deploy these solutions, which are always situated on-premises.

The main use cases for our customers include end-user connectivity, IP telephony, and security purposes such as for the cameras and access points.

The top feature of Meraki MS switches for me is Layer 7 application visibility. Another positive in general is that you don't need to set up a console to the switch itself; it dials in to a single dashboard where you can completely manage all your network devices.

In my opinion, there's room for improvement cost-wise. With Meraki's licensing terms, you're required to pay an annual licensing fee, which can be for a one-year license or perhaps a five-year license. But if you analyze the costs involved, there are huge expenses incurred as far as the licensing is concerned. It's very costly.

When you see the cost of the device and the cost of the license, they're almost the same. So let's say, for example, a device costs $4,200 and you go for a three or four year license, it will cost you the same. And that's for everything; for the wireless, the switches, the firewalls, everything.

Of course, the total costs depend on several factors, including the customer requirements, the service provider, and the service integrators (which may have their own partnership bias). With Cisco partners, there are gold level partners which will have different discounts to the silver partners, for instance. Given these factors, I always try to get the maximum discount from the vendor so I can offer a solution to my customers at the lowest margin.

Apart from costs, one improvement that I would like to see in terms of features concerns the mobile application. Most users of our switches are now on the web-based interface and I feel it's time for Meraki to start developing the mobile app more seriously, because it's currently not up to standard and a lot of people aren't using it.

I've been using Meraki MS Switches for about six to eight years.

For the cloud license model, the stability of the switches largely depends on your Internet capability. For example, you will want to have both primary and secondary backbone connections for the Internet, and that's it. The stability of the hardware is fine.

I would say that it's scalable, especially in the sense that there are models up to at least 10 Mbps and at the upper range there are 10 Gbps copper switches. Then there are switches that support 1 Gbps fiber as well as 40 Gbps fiber (via QSFP). Thus, there are enough models to offer the scalability that you need as far as bandwidth is concerned.

There are fixed-model switches and also some older model switches to choose from, so it depends upon the customer's requirements to decide on their own solution. When it comes to scalability, there are various options available. 

Cisco is always top-notch when it comes to technical support. It's reassuring to know that they will be there to assist you in solving your issues. Of course, there are sometimes priority cases, but even then they make sure to be available to help you resolve the issue. It doesn't matter if you're a customer, a partner, or a service provider, they provide an excellent technical support service.

Positive

The setup is very easy. It's typically a one-touch provisioning process and it's like not traditional switches where you have to put in a lot of effort bringing the switch up and running with a basic configuration. With Meraki switches, all you need is a status page where you can log in locally. As soon as you connect it to the Internet, the device is on board and on the cloud, and you can start playing around with it.

You don't need a lot of technical staff to implement the switches. One engineer is capable of doing it alone and, in fact, most of the time it just takes a single team member to deploy. Naturally, this would be an individual who knows the product inside and out, to be able to deploy without anyone's help. You also need a few remote hands who can rack and stack the equipment, but as far as the configuration is concerned, only one engineer can do everything.

I had one scenario where I had 120 devices divided into three different models. Four of them were Layer 3 fiber switches which acted as the core switches and 16 of them were fiber switches for distribution, also with Layer 3 capability. Then we had almost a hundred devices acting as access switches, which is normally Layer 2 PoE-capable switches where we have a couple of SFP ports for the uplink. All of this a single person would be able to deploy in five working days, at eight hours a day.

When it comes to maintenance, it depends on the size of the infrastructure. In a retail mall, for example, you will have hardly 150 switches, compared to a big hotel or apartment building where you will have more than 200-300 switches. With those kinds of deployments, you will have to have multiple people to address the multiple issues with the guests.

There is a lot of scope for ROI with Meraki, mainly because your headcount will go down. With Meraki switches, you don't need to have too many people around to manage the infrastructure, and you don't have to travel much to maintain multiple branches across the globe.

Additionally, you won't need to spend much in terms of reporting tools, log tools (e.g. log collectors), or anything like that because everything is included in the product. There's a lot of sophistication and features that Meraki brings in terms of Layer 7 application visibility. You really have complete control over the end-users infrastructure.

If you buy a license for one switch, it will include the licensing for the device RMA, device failure warranty, technical support, and everything else. Also covered is support for software updates for future releases. It's a single license for everything and there's nothing that customers need to pay in addition to the license.

I would rate Meraki MS Switches an eight out of ten.

We use the solution for our networking.

The most beneficial features of Meraki MS Switches are the visibility and convenience they provide. We have a single-pane-of-glass and a cloud-based management dashboard, so we do not need to manually configure each device. This is the greatest advantage. Additionally, they are easy to deploy with zero-touch provisioning, meaning that even those with limited technical knowledge can connect the devices.

Meraki MS Switches do not offer as many features as their competitors, so we are quite limited in what we can configure on the switches and firewalls. They are meant to be simple, but perhaps they should offer advanced features for more experienced users who would like to opt for them. I would suggest improving the price as well, as Meraki MS Switches are quite expensive due to their Cisco branding.

Perhaps in a future release, we could implement security technologies that are not yet available, such as SAC. To do this, we may need to purchase different types of switches; for example, Cisco has an access switch for data centers that allows for virtual port channeling, which cannot be done with a regular switch. However, this is a different market and use case.

The price of the solution has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for almost four years.

The solution is stable and we have not encountered any issues. Meraki MS Switches have a familiar life cycle, so we are not required to upgrade. Everything can be done automatically as long as we adhere to the most common scenarios; we should be good. We have 150 locations where we use them and we have not experienced any stability issues.

The solution is scalable. The solution is suitable for all organization sizes, except for those that are very large and require a service provider or data center, footage. Meraki should be a good fit as long as a reasonable price can be negotiated and the technology is compatible.

Technical support is quite satisfactory. It may not be as great as Cisco support, but it is much better than other vendors I have had to work with. Response times are still quite fast and we can call someone if we have an urgent problem, with reasonable waiting times. Whenever I have needed help, I either get the answer or am being pointed in the right direction. Overall, it is quite satisfactory.

Neutral

The pricing varies. If we start with this small eight-plus switch, it is quite inexpensive. However, if we need some ten gig switches, it can be very expensive, ranging up to $10,000 or $18,000. Additionally, we also need to purchase the license, making it more costly than the regular Cisco Catellis.

I evaluated Ubiquiti UniFi.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

It makes sense to purchase Meraki MS Switches if we already have other Meraki devices, such as IPs. Getting the switches is a good choice, or if we plan to use the full Meraki stack, including the firewall, switch, and AP, then we will benefit from visibility in the dashboard. If we mix and match equipment, then it is not ideal as support may not be as good, and we may have difficulty identifying the source of any issues. If we use Meraki, then they will take responsibility for any issues on the network.

Ubiquiti UniFi Switches are the main competitor to Meraki MS Switches because they offer a range of products, including switches, access points, security appliances, cameras, and more. However, Ubiquiti is primarily focused on small-to-middle-sized businesses, and their prices are lower than Meraki's. However, they do not provide the same level of support or documentation as Meraki, and their warranty is much shorter - only one year compared to Meraki's lifetime warranty on data devices.

We use Meraki MS Switches to can the VLANs to a particular port.

The most valuable features of Meraki MS Switches are the GUI mode which is helpful for access and good dashboards.

When we do any changes to the core switch it causes the devices to reboot.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for approximately one and a half years.

The solution is stable.

We have approximately 1,000 people using the solution.

The support that Meraki MS Switches provides is good.

I rate the support from Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Meraki MS Switches is simple.

I rate the price of Meraki MS Switches a two out of ten.

I did not evaluate other solutions. I have always used Cisco.

I rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten.

I use Meraki MS Switches for cloud-based management and web visibility, which I can control from a single pane of glass. I have a controller that lets me manage all devices.

I found the cloud-managed dashboard most valuable in Meraki MS Switches.

Management from a single dashboard is what I want to see from Meraki MS Switches.

The level of stability of Meraki MS Switches would depend on the environment.

My rating for Meraki MS Switches is nine out of ten in terms of scalability.

The Meraki MS Switches technical support is good, so I rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup for Meraki MS Switches was straightforward and had no problems. The product is easy to manage and deploy. Deployment only took one week.

My company deployed Meraki MS Switches based on requirements. That was the only deployment strategy.

My company pays for Meraki MS Switches yearly. Pricing-wise, the product is relatively inexpensive.

My company is both a reseller and user of Cisco Meraki solutions, including Meraki MS Switches.

I work on different models of Meraki MS Switches.

My company has multiple clients using Meraki MS Switches.

I recommend the product to others for cloud-based management. You can manage everything from the cloud.

My rating for Meraki MS Switches is nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a switch.

It's better for small businesses.

The solution is well-managed and easy to deliver.

Its cloud feature and cloud management are great. They are the most valuable aspects.

The setup process is simple.

It is stable. 

We can scale the product.

Cisco gives very good support.

The pricing is very good. 

If they added the option to manage it locally, not in the cloud, it would be better. 

Cisco has to make improvements to the ordering page CCW. If it could be the same as Cisco Switches, it would be way better.

For example, Cisco has a page called CCW where you can put in and order the switches and all other items from Cisco. Meraki has some difficulties in terms of adding its products to this page. You cannot enter it. You can memorize the product number ICQ by name. Other Cisco Switches, without memorization, you can put in them in.

I've been using the solution for five years. 

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

Technical support is very good. Cisco offers the best technical support.

I'm working with Cisco. That's all.

We found the initial setup to be simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex.

This is an easy product to scale. 

We only use it for a small business, for a branch offices and remote workers. There are maybe 50 users at this time. 

The pricing is reasonable. I'd rate it four out of five in terms of affordability.

The licensing and support last up to seven years. You pay for it once, and it lasts for around that long. 

We did not compare the solution with another vendor as we only work with Cisco. 

We're a distributor and reseller.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

It's a cloud-managed, stackable access switch. It has various features, like providing quality of service to prioritize critical traffic, such as voice and video. It has various levels of support for simplified voice deployment. We also use this switch for multicast traffic. In addition, we use the switch for high capacity trunking where we require link aggregations. 

This switch is enabled with network security features. We use it for port security and MAC whitelisting, as well as DHCP snooping to prevent users from adding unauthorized DHCP servers to the network. The switch supports BPDU guard, root guard, and rapid spanning tree protocol for the loop prevention mechanism.

Moreover, now with the advent of automation in our environment, the switch supports various automation testing tools, and it's quite helpful for network troubleshooting as well.

The switch has a good speed and low latency. I will not say it's the market leader of low latency, but it competes with Arista switches in terms of latency. 

It is a compact switch, so there are a limited number of ports, and it needs improvement in terms of scalability. The number of ports should be increased. I would love to see modular capabilities, and various security features, like the ones provided by Palo Alto and various emerging cybersecurity solutions. I would like this switch to match that level of competency.

This switch is robust. It's never, ever gone down. It has not been rebooted during the last two years in my environment. In terms of stability, I don't see any challenges. I haven't seen any bugs associated with the current IOS. 

It is a scalable solution, but compared to competitors' technology, I still see some gaps. There are a lot of scalability improvements needed in this particular model.

There are 500+ on-prem users. Counting business employees altogether though, there are about 2,000. 

The support is quite easy and handy. No one can compete with Cisco's tech support.

The initial setup was very straightforward. I have been in the IT industry for the last 16 years so I didn't have any challenges with the configuration or deployment. It is a plug and play solution, and needs basic configuration during the initial setup. We pushed the configuration and provisioned this switch immediately. 

I see a return on investment in terms of manageability because a single employee can easily manage the switch. I don't need to hire additional resources for taking care of the vulnerability assessment or anything else.

I don't know the exact price, but in terms of comparison, I know that Extreme switches are more cost-effective than Cisco Meraki Switches. Cisco should have some switches that are more cost-effective.

There are some other competitors nowadays, like Extreme switches. They are cost-effective and have many security features embedded in the switches. We want to see that level of competency for modular capabilities in Meraki switches soon. I still see Cisco as the market leader because no one can compete with Cisco's fast tech support.

To someone considering this solution I would say that compared to other switches, like Arista, Meraki switches are quite robust. In terms of performance, we haven't faced any issues or vulnerabilities in the last two years. 

I would rate this solution as a ten out of ten. 

We use this solution as a switch.

The features are great.

It's scalable. The expandability and ease of use are excellent. 

We like how easy the manageability is. 

The evolution of the product was also quite good. It's always getting better and better. 

It's very easy to set up.

This product is stable. The reliability is great.

Its troubleshooting features need work. They could adopt a console approach that could be more helpful.

If they offered more advanced management features, that would be useful. It is a cloud service; for example, if I were about to buy such a product, I would be very concerned about having cloud management for my switches. Anyone can have access from all over the world, and you can reload the switches from everywhere. That's fine. However, security is a bit of a concern for the cloud.

I've used the solution for the last five years. 

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

The product can scale well. It's not a problem at all. I've seen the evolution, and the scalability potential is one of the things that makes it more competitive than other products.

This product can work for both smaller and quite large organizations. 

I've been working with Cisco for years now, so technical support was always something that turned us on to solutions with Cisco. We are pretty satisfied.

I've also worked with Fortinet as well as Cisco. 

The solution is quite simple and straightforward. It's not hard to set up.

I'm not sure of the pricing. It's not an aspect I deal with directly. 

If I compare it with Fortinet switches or HPE switches. Overall, the benefits that you gain with the ease of use and the manageability with Meraki are good. Also, many products from other companies are more unstable. That's one of the reasons why our first choice was Catalyst Switches.

I've worked with various Meraki solutions - not just switches. I've used access points, firewalls, etc. 

I'd recommend the solution is problem-free for the most part. However, the cost needs to be taken into account, and new users should work to calculate costs before agreeing to buy. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I'm a customer and end-user. 

The solution is used for different office locations. The client wanted to have central control from their headquarters on wireless across a number of users, traffic, NMS. It was more of a network and switching type of deployment. They have some applications which they want to track, including how much traffic is going to the user and uptime of devices. For that, they wanted more central management.

We like that it can work on a cloud basis. It gives the customer a choice to be operated from a central location and it can be controlled from there. Our customers mostly opted for having a centralized approach.

It's a proactive approach to networking for IT infrastructure. It will bring better uptime and availability to the network.

The initial setup is easy.

They need more variety in terms of models to satisfy different customer requirements. There are very limited models right now. The range of models could expand.  

They need to work on prioritizing different types of data on the network, whether it's voice, data, video, et cetera. Video needs to be prioritized in a much better way, for example.

If there are certain search protocols added to these switches that make for better network trafficking, that would be ideal.

The lack of availability of hardware is causing issues and bottlenecks. 

We'd like interoperability to continue to be improved. 

We've been dealing with the solution for two years.

The stability is okay. 

I understand Cisco has far more stable products. For example, Cisco Catalyst. That is more stable as compared to Cisco Meraki.

I'd rate the stability four out of five overall. 

The scalability is fine. It's not an issue for us. Cisco is always working on scalability.

I'd rate it four out of five in terms of scalability. This is a new product that is still being refined. However, as they are working on the cloud, it's only going to get better. 

We have around 250 to 300 users based on the switches we've deployed. It's in an international organization with many departments and many levels of people working on it. 

Technical support is good. It is good only for certain areas. Their support needs to be improved to level it out for everyone. Even a premier customer may not get answers within the next business day.

We use Cisco Meraki Switches and Cisco Meraki Wireless.

Cisco has a big problem right now. Their availability of hardware is delayed due to high demand. A lot of system integrators and companies are opting for different hardware providers as they understand that deploying Cisco will take a long time. Cisco needs to work on faster deployment. The manufacturing side needs to speed up deploying hardware to meet demand or they will lose market share.

That said, once you have the hardware, the initial setup is not hard at all. 

We have two to three engineers that can help set up the solution. It depends on the kind of project. For example, if there are four or five switches, so it doesn't take more than two days to settle that. IN that case, maybe we need to have two different engineers: one physically installing the hardware switching and doing the basic configuration and then maybe an L2 engineer who configures things on the cloud and brings different switches alive. We have certified Cisco people. We don't get any problems in terms of deployment. We can also easily handle maintenance tasks. 

I'd rate ROI a three out of five as it is costly. The ROI is not very fast. No doubt they are getting ROI with the cloud-based approach. That said, not everything is on the cloud as of now. The transition is happening very slowly. Some departments and customers are partly on the cloud, not fully. If they're deploying anything like Meraki, they're not getting fast ROI as they're not fully on the cloud. They're not fully utilizing the benefits.

The cost is on the higher side if we are comparing it with Catalyst. It's approximately double the cost. Cisco needs to work on licensing if they want the system to be deployed more. They can have the same set of licensing: standard, premium. Premium customers who don't have any budget issues can buy premium license-based hardware. However, if there are customers who want to deploy good hardware like Cisco yet have budget constraints, they should offer a more affordable tier. 

I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability.

We're resellers. We've been dealing with the 300 and 390 series. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

Meraki switches are appropriate for small and medium-sized businesses. Most recently, I worked with Meraki switches when I was helping my last two clients transition to a new service provider. One is a printing company, and the other is a tourist and convention center. One was moving from Ubiquiti to Meraki. 

Meraki switches greatly increase our clients' security.

I like the flexibility of the Meraki firewall. It gives you the ability to lock things down. Having multiple VLANs is helpful for the switching infrastructure and firewall. It's crucial when you have a public-facing VLAN, a private-facing VLAN, and a secure VLAN. 

The documentation could be more extensive. For example, it could describe more scenarios.  It would be great if they could incorporate AI engines into the switching infrastructure and firewall so you can configure it to prevent intrusion. They have intrusion prevention and detection, but they could enhance it by incorporating AI into their firewall.

The switching infrastructure doesn't need AI so much, but it would undoubtedly benefit their firewalls. That would be enormously helpful in creating the secure infrastructure most clients want. Hacking is a significant concern as the country becomes increasingly dependent on digital infrastructures.

I've used Meraki switches for around seven years. I'm an integrator and a networking consultant. I assess the client's infrastructure and develop solutions for them. For example, I had one client for more than 20 years. I set up their initial infrastructure and updated it as it grew and increased in complexity over two decades.

In general, Meraki switches are highly stable. In one implementation, we had some issues, but that had more to do with how the facility was constructed. Some switches went down. The electrical setup in the facility wasn't as robust as it needed to be, so we had things go out because of storms. However, I've had no problems whatsoever with other clients.

Meraki switches are highly scalable, but I've mostly dealt with small and medium-sized businesses. You need to add enough devices to scale up to a thousand or 5,000 users. These days, that can be challenging because of supply chain issues.
 

Meraki support is fine. Sometimes it's a little slow, but I think that's due to the pandemic. It was superb prior to the pandemic. I rate Meraki support eight out of 10. 

I've worked with solutions from different vendors, including Cisco ASA 400s and Fortinet FortiGate firewalls. I had one client on FortiGate, but I transitioned them to Meraki when they doubled the size of their office. They needed a more robust solution. 

The other client had Ubiquiti in place, but the whole network was cobbled together and hadn't been maintained properly. Their server infrastructure was toast. They had been a client many years earlier. I was called in to remedy their predicament because their in-house support was useless, so we designed some things and stabilized everything. Their security was far superior to what it was before. 

Deploying Meraki MS switches is pretty straightforward if you have a background in networking, and I've been doing this for 25 years. The deployment time depends on the complexity of your environment, but a simple deployment takes less than an hour. It will take longer if you are doing a more complex deployment with multiple DHCP servers and VLANs. 

The switches don't require much maintenance, and you can manage them remotely once they are deployed. It's convenient to have someone on site, but not necessary.

My clients say they're fine with the investment. In one case, I work with the vice president and CFO. He's pleased with it, but I don't have the financial data points.

You can buy licenses for one, three, five, or 10 years, and it's pricey. The hardware changes. For example, you couldn't get the speeds we have today unless you had some high-end internet. 

You may have had a nice infrastructure that was fine for a hundred megabits per second, but the minute you get up to 500 or 1 gig or higher, the infrastructure is insufficient, so you need to purchase new equipment. That's just the name of the game. Equipment and licensing costs go up. I don't know if there's a way to get around that. I really don't think so.

I stopped evaluating other solutions later in my career because I was sold on Meraki by that point. If you spend too much time looking at other options, you don't solve the problem necessarily. 

I'm a tiny outfit, and I was pretty much retiring. I knew Meraki to be a good solution, and I use it personally. It's something I'm familiar with that I can support remotely. If a device goes down, we simply get another one in place, and everything downloads from the cloud. Replacing or scaling up is simple once things are configured correctly and working, 

I rate Meraki MS Switches10 out of 10. I must add the caveat that I don't have experience with hundreds of different solutions. I haven't made a lot of comparisons, but Meraki solutions have worked extremely well for my clients. I'm happy with that. 

If you asked me why, I would say it's the robustness of the solution. Cisco continues to invest in Meraki and come out with new products. Their support is top-notch, and the configuration is straightforward and logical. It's one of the better solutions out there.

These last two clients have been pleased with Meraki, though they also use FortiGate. This is probably their first real in-depth foray into Meraki infrastructure. 

If you're considering Meraki, do your homework. You must have a clear idea of where your client is now and their expectations. What do they hope to get out of the solution?  It has more to do with building a proper client relationship than it does with hardware and licensing costs. You have to be upfront with all of that, of course, because they're looking to you to get that information. You must be thorough in your research and present multiple options.