Meraki MS Switches Reviews

We primarily use the solution for switches. 

The switches are great. The basic features are sufficient. 

The stability is good.

You can scale the product.

Support has been very good. 

The solution offers very good integration potential.

The pricing is fair and offers good value. 

Since 2019, we have not encountered any problems with the switches. On our servers, there are occasionally some bugs or some problems with some features that need Meraki support; however, everything works well with Meraki Switches. 

We aren't missing any features. 

We've used the solution since 2019. We've used it for a few years now. 

For the most part, the solution is stable. Upgrades are typically great. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

We do not have issues with the scalability. It's very easy to expand. 

There are more than 20 companies using the solution, however, I don't have details about how many individual users are at each company.

As we have Cisco Premier, when we have to call them, Meraki is very fast in solving our tickets and definitely was very fast in their support. It's very, very good. We can call them directly and get immediate help.

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis. We pay a standard fee and there are no additional costs.

While it may not be the cheapest, for the quality you receive, the price is very good. 

We are resellers. 

We are a Cisco Premier Partner, and we're trying to do Meraki certifications. It's in progress.

We provide Meraki to our customers, and it's working well.

Meraki's on the cloud. All solutions that are using SD-WAN is managed on the cloud.

Almost all our customers here in the Madagascar area are 49 or 24FP versions of Meraki MS 210. It's suitable for all our customers here.

We recommend the solution. 

It's reliable and I advise others to use it. If they are using Meraki Switches, I recommend them to use also the firewalls and access points. They work well with everything in one dashboard. It's better to pay and have the firewall, switches, and access points together to get a good view on the dashboard and the management. It's better to use Meraki. It is very, very stable.

I'd rate the switches a nine out of ten.

For our customers, there are multiple locations, around 3,500.

My configuration is to do the configurations on Cisco Meraki Dashboard. There are MS Avant switches, MS switches, MS routers, et cetera. Mostly, I work with all the switches, switch modems and routers, and access points also.

The switches are very stable. 

It's able to expand.

The product is easy to set up. 

Sometimes, when we plug the new switch into the internet, they will upgrade there and it'll take time. At times, we didn't know whether the switch was operating or not so we have to take the console and we have to do some troubleshooting. In the console, we can find out there if the Cisco Meraki switch is not connected with the Meraki cloud. 

The MG21 is not working on a 5G SIM card. It requires 4G SIM cards. Therefore, we are using two links, an internet broadband link and one for MG21 that is on SIM card based for small sites. We all suffer a lot of issues for MG21. 

I've been using the solution for five years. 

It is stable as a product. The solution is reliable. There aren't any bugs or glitches. 

It is a product that can scale. It's not a problem.

Typically, if I run into issues, I'd run them by my team lead. I don't reach out to Cisco directly. It's a good solution. We don't run into many issues. 

I previously used Cisco and HP switches. 

I've also used an Alcatel switch.

The solution is very straightforward, actually. It is not complex. This is a simple product to configure.

In terms of the ease of setup, I'd rate it a nine out of ten. 

I'm not familiar with the exact cost of the solution. 

Our organization has a partnership with Meraki.

It is a good product and it is scalable. It is not too complex in terms of configuration. It supports a lot of technology.

I'd rate the product eight out of ten. 

We use Meraki MS Switches to provide network security. We have around 900 users.

I've been using Meraki MS Switches for five years.

Meraki switches are stable. 

Meraki switches are easy to scale. 

We haven't had any major issues, but we've gotten general support from them.

Setting up a Meraki switch is fairly simple. It can be done by one manager and a senior engineer developer. 

We did it in-house.

The licensing cost isn't too expensive. 

I rate Meraki MS switches nine out of 10. I would absolutely recommend it to other people.

We are a technology consultant and we work with a variety of products, including Meraki MS Switches. We have installed these switches in certain hotels in Egypt.

One of the hotels we work with has standardized on Meraki.

Meraki's support for outdoor switches is something that we're facing problems with. This is an area that needs to be improved.

Meraki should include an application to assist users with the design of access points.

We have been working with Meraki MS Switches for perhaps two years.

This is a good switch for a small installation, such as a hotel, but it's not an enterprise-level solution. In that regard, it is not very scalable.

The hotel network has almost 300 rooms.

We have no problem with technical support from Cisco. They have good support, although it's not cheap. 

We have experience with switches from different vendors including Cisco and HP.

HPE Aruba is very popular in my country, and we have done a lot of these installations. Most people, given the choice between Aruba and Cisco, choose to implement Aruba.

One of the advantages to Aruba is that the switches have a lifetime warranty. They are also cheaper than Cisco.

We have not faced any problems with respect to installation. They just need internet connectivity for the cloud configuration.

Installation is done by the system integrators.

Meraki is not an expensive switch, like Cisco. However, the cost of technical support is expensive.

We have researched different Cisco solutions. One of the things that we have found is that Stealthwatch for Cisco has the sensors built into the switches. We are interested in knowing whether that feature is compatible with other hardware because we don't want to be tied to a single vendor.

Some companies in Egypt are not allowed to use cloud-based services, so the use of this type of product has not been popular.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

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.

Positive

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 primarily use the solution for switching delivery. It's quite basic. It provides connectivity. They are ethernet switches.

We like the ability to perform data capture and open it with Wireshark in case of issues.

For me, the best functionality is provided by Meraki for any device. The ability to manage the devices for the dashboard online, from the online dashboard. It is great.

The product is very straightforward. 

The stability of the product is very good. 

The switch capacity needs to be improved. Today we deploy some MS switches for the data center. Previously, it was a small data center and we get the most powerful device into the portfolio of Meraki to respond to this subject. However,  it could be great to have a better capacity with 10 gigs or 40 gigs, for example.

As a physical device, it's not extremely scalable.

We started to resell Meraki devices to our customers around 2016. It's been around six years. 

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

The product is not scalable. It's a physical device and therefore limited. 

It's possible when you have virtualization, for example. For VMX, maybe, by the deployment VMX by Terraform and configuration automation, it's possible. However, with the physical devices, and so the switches, with the stack, we have scalability with the ports, with the interfaces, through a new device. I did it to the stack, however, globally, the solution, it's not as scalable as it could be. However, it's just due to the fact that it is a physical device.

The support is very good. We are very satisfied with the technical support we get. They always resolve the issues we have.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Juniper or Huawei. The main differences between them are the facility to configure or deploy, and ease of use. Meraki is a real plug-and-play solution. That's why it's really good. With Juniper in particular you do need strong skills to get the most out of it. 

It's a straightforward setup. It's not overly difficult. That's why we continue to use Meraki. I'd rate the product four out of five. 

The deployment is very quick. It takes only a few seconds to a few minutes. It's very fast. We have developed some API applications to automate the configuration and deployment without using the dashboard. We only need to put up a .CSV file and everything is done automatically. 

It is a good solution, however, it is quite expensive. I'd rate the cost at a three out of five. You do have to pay for the license, however, the licensing is quite expensive. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. We are quite satisfied with the solution genera. 

When Meraki creates a VPN, you don't even have to configure it. You say that you want this to talk, and it automatically creates a connection. That's the greatest part of it. You don't have to deal with passwords and keys.

Meraki's site-to-site VPN function is phenomenal, and the VLAN is simple to use and set up. If you need the VLAN to sort the networks out, that works very well. The performance is also excellent.

I've been using Meraki MS Switches for a couple of years now.

Meraki MS Switches are rock solid. We haven't had any downtime.

It'll scale up as much as I need, and there are many more options higher than what I've got, so their scalability is superb. Right now, we have about 40 users.

Cisco support is excellent. 

I had some Hewlett Packard switches before. We decided to go with Meraki because it offers a holistic integrated solution with management through a single pane of glass.

Setting up a Meraki switch is straightforward. You just plug it in, and it goes. I could do it all myself.

Licensing is the only thing I can complain about. It's expensive, but everything is these days. There are no added costs beyond the hardware. Overall, I rate Meraki MS Switches eight out of 10 for affordability. 

I rate Meraki MS Switches 10 out of 10. If you're considering Meraki, I say do it. You'll never look back.

A primary use case involves small to mid-sized offices consisting of under five hundred ports. 

While I do not have metrics to demonstrate how the product has improved the functioning of my organization, I can state that the upgrades to the portal have made it easier to manage the switches and the flexibility of the configurations. As for deployment, as you know, there are obviously multiple configuration styles. If you are going to do layer three at the edge, layer three at the core, the flexibility of the devices is very good. I cannot state to what extent improvements accrue to the investment, although I do know it is getting better.

The most valuable feature of the product is the console. The second most valuable feature is the technical support and the infrastructure behind the console.

Performance is an area in need of improvement. Other systems, such as Juniper switches, perform better for the same or less money. For consistency and ease of use, Cisco is definitely better, but performance is where things fall short. 

Price to performance value when compared with competitors is a feature that should be addressed in the next release. 

I have been working with Meraki MS Switches for four or five years. I try to use the latest models available. I have used the 250 and 450 and will have to check if I used another one. 

The product has good stability. 

The product demonstrates good scalability. 

I want to use the product so that I may plug it in and set it up in fifteen minutes. Then, when I have to troubleshoot something, it's easy. When I have a problem with the network, I call up technical support and they help. They actually help.

With other companies, when asking for something beyond the scope of technical support's outline, I would have the feeling of being deferred and not receiving the necessary help.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

I choose to rate the product a nine out of ten because of the cost. Remember, you and I are not paying for the equipment. Someone is paying for it. Someone has to be willing to pay the premium for this and they have to see the value. I am not a salesman, but if I want to go with Cisco, I need to show the client the better value of buying Cisco Meraki over Ubiquiti.

Another system I evaluated is Juniper switches. 

I am using it to put it in a secure end-to-end solution in my IT lab. I am using MX65. I have got three Meraki solutions. I have the switch, the access point, and the appliance itself.

Being able to look at every port and see what it is connected to is very useful. Everything seems to be running really well. They've got everything covered.

They have a really cool mounting system at the bottom and an access point that you can use to level up your device. It is kind of cool.

It would be great if they can get the price down for small businesses.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is rock solid.

They are after a certain market, that is, the small business market. You wouldn't put a Meraki solution at an enterprise level. That's not the market that they want to go after. You would probably scale up to full Cisco for that.

They've always been really good. To be able to get somebody at the end of the line is the real advantage of having a subscription-based solution. I had to wait for maybe three minutes at the most.

You can initiate a service request from the device itself, which is something that not too many companies do. When you're logged into the interface, you can see who your rep is. You have full connection to support. If you want to learn how to configure VLAN, you just click on the support ticket, it generates a ticket. It figures out your number and other information and sends an inquiry ticket with Meraki, and they call you back.

I have used a lot of stuff at the lower end, such as SonicWall, Linksys, and TP-link. I have also used the actual Cisco stuff, but it just never worked together. I haven't worked with Ubiquiti, but I believe that they've got a similar product. I haven't been hands-on with Fortinet, but I understand that they have a quite selective setup as well.

In terms of security and intelligence, Linksys and other such solutions tend to be more for the home business, so they are not really competing with each other. Ubiquiti competes with them, but I haven't worked with Ubiquiti.

Its setup is very easy. A kid could do this stuff. It is cloud-based. There is one interface for all three devices. They are all tied together under a web console.

I configured it myself, and I am not a real techie guy.

You need one person for its maintenance. I pretty much do it all myself.

They can get the price down for small businesses. The way I bought it, I paid hardly anything, and I got all my licensing with it.

The firewall appliance is around $900, and the switches are around $150. This is for the device itself. For licensing, I signed at $70 or something like that for the switch. Technical Support is included in this.

I wouldn't try and manage any piece of Cisco equipment by itself. You wouldn't want to just buy a Meraki Switch. You wouldn't be able to access it the same way as your firewall. It is only when you start off with an MS cloud appliance, you can add on the Meraki stuff.

I would rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten. They are a good rig.