Meraki MX Reviews

We use MX to provide Wifi for all the clients, patients, doctors, nurses, etc. in our hospital, they are using the WiFi to use the internet. So, we are using it mainly for the internet. It is managed via a cloud-based Cisco dashboard.

MX is easy to manage, configure and install. 

MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients. 

They could also add improve the content filter by adding Arabic. It only filters English-language content. Meraki should work on that feature for other languages.

I've been using Meraki MX for two or three years. 

MX is stable. The updates go smoothly, and there are no issues.

MX is scalable. We sometimes have 300 to 400 users connected at the same time. It's a highly stable product. 

I used the ADSL Cisco router.  It was a catastrophe due to limitations on users. Once we exceeded around 200 simultaneous users, we started seeing a lot of problems.

Deploying MX is easy. It takes maybe half an hour. I didn't need any support. I could do it all myself.

I believe we need to review our contract and maybe get a lower price when we upgrade our renew our license. Hopefully, we can negotiate with Cisco for lower prices.

I studied other options, but I found Meraki was a complete product for allowing large amounts of users to connect to the internet.

I rate Meraki MX eight out of 10. It is a good product. 

Meraki MX is a firewall with wireless capabilities built in. We use the APs in approximately 10 different customer sites.

The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers.

I have been using Meraki MX for approximately six years.

Meraki MX is a dependable solution.

Meraki MX is scalable. I have the Meraki MX set up from Oklahoma all through several of the big cities in Tennessee and northern Alabama. We use it, and we run it for a particular company for voice-over IP phones. It works well. I don't have any issues with them. We can set up virtual networks, separating data and voice traffic.

Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies.

The support from Meraki MX is good. It is easy to get in touch with technical support 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are responsive and knowledgeable.

I have previously used Barracuda. For larger companies, such as banks and financial institutions, I use Barracuda firewalls. However, they are more complex. You have to have penetration testing. Every year we have penetration testing from external companies to make sure no one can get in because they have federal audits that come in and check banks. Barracuda is the better solution for this purpose, we've had great luck with them. We've always had perfect scores whenever we deploy them and we have external penetration tests. They have a 24-hour day, seven days week support similar to Meraki MX.

Meraki MX is simple to deploy and manage. You only need to plug it in and configure it.

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

The price of Meraki MX is between $8 and $1,200. Additionally, we typically purchase a three-year enterprise license, and we pay approximately $899 and mark it up a bit.

I would recommend others call us, we can implement the solution for them.

We have three technicians for maintenance, and we all can handle servers, firewalls, and routers. Once we put the Meraki MX in, it doesn't require much maintenance. It has automatic updates and we receive all the firmware updates. Once they're in place, we don't have any issues with them. However, if we do, it's easy to get in and make configuration changes.

I rate Meraki MX a nine out of ten.

I use the solution for some simple usage in our office for the people, so there is nothing too much. I am interested in the scalability of the tool.

The solution's most valuable features stem from the single pane of glass dashboard, along with other components of the tool like configuration, administration, monitoring part, integration capabilities with Cisco solutions, and ease of comparison with other Cisco equipment or Cisco Meraki hardware devices.

I don't think I can comment on what needs improvement in the solution because of the usage of Meraki MX in our company. The tool is not complex. For my type of usage, I am satisfied with the results of the product. I think that I may use the product on a larger scale.

The fact that the product is a little expensive and how it needs to be made cheaper from an improvement perspective is a debatable topic, in my opinion.

I have been using Meraki MX for a year and a half.

I use only Cisco hardware in my building, where I also have my network with Meraki MX. I don't have any problems, and I haven't tested the equipment in a multi-vendor environment.

I didn't reach the need to use a relevant scalability test in my company because I am using the tool for the first time for just two users and four guest users. Before I can talk about scalability, I should use the tool's scalability features.

I prefer Meraki MX for personal use. In professional terms, I am working with Cisco on a regional basis in Europe.

I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

For networking and my personal use, Meraki MX is the first infrastructure I have experience with, but on a professional side, I use Cisco.

The product's initial setup phase was simple, considering how Meraki's documentation is very intuitive, which explains how to use the platform, its configuration capabilities, and its administration.

The solution is deployed on the private cloud.

Depending on the purpose of the solution for the user, it might be worth the money. If a user wants to use extra hardware equipment at its full potential or full features on a long-term basis, Meraki MX is a good choice. If you don't want to have a complex tool with features, workload, and so on, Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution.

The product is a little expensive.

I did not choose any other solutions in the market since I got familiar with Meraki MX. I wanted to start with Meraki MX because I thought it was the most appropriate hardware that I could use, especially to add access points, some IoT devices, and switches. Meraki MX is a tool that I can build an infrastructure around.

Within Cisco, I checked for second-generation MV cameras.

For sure, I will recommend the tool's potential users to at least do a demo because one of the best parts of interacting with Meraki is that users can use a demo version for a certain period and do their own tests to see if it is okay or not. After I was okay with the functionalities, I went to use the product for myself.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The solution is mainly based on the cloud which is highly adaptable to the needs of its users due to its large user base. By employing over fifty VPS, we strategically position these units where clients require them the most. Remarkably, the cost of this setup is notably more affordable compared to competing alternatives. The management dashboard allows users to oversee each branch within their network. This comprehensive view is unified within the dashboard, offering insights into the entire branch network. The system works mostly for financial institutions, particularly banking clients.

The cloud management system is really valuable.           

Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts.

The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free.

I have been using Meraki MX for the last three years.

The solution is stable however there are issues and we need to reboot sometimes. I would rate it five out of ten. 

Considering the needs of medium-class clients, scalability proves to be highly advantageous. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The initial setup is easy via the cloud portal, primarily because managed support is needed for internet access. Without this, the direct configuration of the box becomes unattainable.The duration required is significantly shorter compared to alternatives. Occasionally, when dealing with a larger number of branches, like fifty or more, we managed to complete the implementation within 14 days. In cases involving complex processes and discussions, additional time might be necessary. However, once the system is set up and connected to the cloud, other configurations can be done within an eight-hour timeframe.

This solution is viable for medium-sized enterprises and even larger ones, presenting an affordable option. The scalability aspect should be factored in, considering the specific branch alterations. For branch placements, Meraki offers a suitable scalability model, adaptable based on the branch size and user count. We own a range of appropriately sized Meraki boxes to address varying branch needs. When attending to any issues, especially during branch implementations, on-site visits might be necessary. However, in the absence of cloud management, Meraki can be easily managed centrally and remotely. This approach facilitates efficient updates, configuration management, and comprehensive visibility, all streamlined within a single dashboard. 

I would rate overall solution a seven out of ten. 

We use Meraki MX for system networking.

Meraki MX’s most valuable feature is cloud and app management. Additionally has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues.

We can’t access GUI management and CLI opening features when the Internet is unavailable.

We have been using Meraki MX for two years.

I rate the platform’s stability a seven and a half.

We have two administrators and 600 end users for Meraki MX.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

The initial setup is complicated when the Internet is unavailable. However, it is easy to configure and takes two years to complete.

The product’s price is reasonable.

I rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

We use Meraki MX for cloud-based networking, particularly as a firewalls and routers.

What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates.

I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done.

Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that.

An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way.

I've been dealing with Meraki MX for four years now.

Stability-wise, Meraki MX is okay. It performs as it's supposed to. There was one hardware failure, and the Meraki team replaced the unit practically overnight, no questions asked.

The technical support for Meraki MX is a ten out of ten for me.

Positive

Meraki MX has a straightforward setup.

The pricing for Meraki MX is all right, but as the hardware needs to be licensed, the cost depends on the complexity of the device and the term. Pricing could be $100 to $10,000 yearly or even more for a more complex device.

My company is a Cisco partner and a reseller of Meraki MX.

My rating for Meraki MX is ten out of ten.

I've used Meraki MX in warehouses for small medical offices and, recently, dispensaries.

To me, the analytics feature is one of the most valuable in Meraki MX. I also find that it has good usability as it's cloud-based.

Another valuable feature of Meraki MX is that it's simple to use and it's user-friendly.

We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick.

Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that.

I've been using Meraki MX on and off over the past seven to eight years.

As far as stability goes, Meraki MX is pretty good.

In terms of scalability, the process of scaling Meraki MX is straightforward.

The initial setup for Meraki MX is very straightforward.

I work in a mid-sized company, and I've used Meraki MX in small business and enterprise settings. On the small business side, two people use the product, but on the enterprise side, about twenty people use Meraki MX because of the number of locations and equipment. My enterprise customer had about forty thousand employees and at least ninety locations.

I'd rate Meraki MX as nine out of ten.

We have migrated all wide area network (WAN) links from the conventional connection to the cloud-managed SD-WAN. 

We have all ranges. We are using the lowest model MX65 and the highest model MX450. We have deployed on-premises and on the cloud because the hardware requires an on-premises placement and then it works on the cloud.

We have more than 1500 users. We have approximately 1500 employees, and we also have guests who are bringing their own devices. Some of the users have got multiple devices, so the number of users increases. When you look at the dashboard, you might find more than 3,000 end-user devices across the group.

Meraki MX has not only simplified our wide area network connectivity operations. It also gave us a very cost-effective solution. As compared to the most expensive MPLS and leased-line circuits, it works on a broadband connection.

It has the most advanced security features, for example, layer 3 and layer 7 firewall capabilities and the end team and IPS protection. It also has IPS, and it has very good functioning of cloning services.

You don't actually have to touch the device. If you have multiple companies in different countries, you don't really require this device to be touched. You can get it delivered directly to any office of a country, and then you can simply put your configuration over the cloud. It's very simplified and easy to manage. 

It gives a very good granular visibility about your network. Earlier, a lot of things were lacking in the network. We were unable to identify where the problem was, but after implementing Meraki MX, we are able to dig down and identify where is the problem. We can easily and quickly identify the sources and the root causes of the issues.

From the improvement perspective, we need more monitoring capabilities. We want to have full-based access visibility, such as, what is happening when something is trying to reach and it is denying. We cannot see some parts of it. 

The integration of active directory with this product is not very fruitful. It has some bugs or lacks in the functionality of active directory integration. We are unable to identify where exactly and whether it has really applied our policy. 

We have been using Meraki MX for more than two years. We deployed this product two years ago.

Stability is there in Meraki MX. The availability is 99%. We have been monitoring the organization for the past two years, and we haven't got any downtime because of Meraki MX. It is either because of the ISP link being down because of non-payment or maybe some issue with ISP link or power outage. We haven't got any problem with Meraki MX itself. 

Their technical support is satisfactory. I would not say very satisfactory, but it's okay. We are only covered with the support license. 

They are good up to some extent, but because we have been using these devices or this product, sometimes, we know better than their support team. In fact, we had a problem related to active data integration with Meraki MX during the implementation, and the support team was unable to resolve it. We resolved it ourselves. We would expect better support from Meraki MX.

We used the conventional Cisco routers.

The initial setup was straightforward. Before deploying Meraki MX, we did a POC for three months, and this POC was successful. In fact, we were given only 60 days, but we took over 90 days to do a complete assessment to see whether this fulfills our needs. When we were sure that this is the right solution for us, we deployed it across the group.

Initially, we required an integrator. There was a vendor who deployed this service, but after the first-time implementation, it was very easy because it's a very quick thing to do. We did not require any assistance from any of the vendors. 

We have got in-house resources. When we get a new device, we don't require any implementation or installation support. We do it ourselves. It's very simple. We've been doing this deployment across the group. Initially, we had about 30 sites. Now, we have 40 sites, and the number of sites is increasing.  

The license cost depends on the box. We acquired a different product line. We are dealing with MX appliance now, that is, MX6, MX54, MX100, MX250, MX450. Every box has got an identity, and it has got its own specification. Every box has got a different license fee.

We deployed Meraki MX in UAE when it was not a mature product. We took a risk, but we were successful. We saved a huge amount of money after implementing and removing all the MPLS and leased lines. We got a broadband connection because Meraki MX could work on a broadband connection. We have drastically saved a very good amount of money, which was one of the successful things apart from the successful solution.

From the IT perspective, people are more relying on the cloud for cloud hosting. Instead of having the data center on-premises or hybrid, people are moving towards cloud hosting. The integration with cloud managed services is there. We have some services hosted on Azure. We also have some services hosted on Amazon. We have a plugin with the cloud manager, Meraki MX. It has VMS features available so that we can have the security and our own private cloud connected to Amazon, Azure, or any cloud services, which is a future proof solution.

I would, of course, recommend Meraki MX. Everyone should have this cloud management solution. We never had any problems after the implementation. This solution also gave us the confidence to deploy across the group. If we had experienced, for example, sluggishness, slowness, or some unreliability, we would have not continued deploying it. Based on this, I would strongly recommend that any company in the world can deploy this product without any hesitation or doubt. It's very reliable. 

They are continuously updating the firmware and resolving the issues. They're always there to help you out. So, we should not be worried about this product. I would highly recommend that the Meraki MX appliance should be deployed.

I would rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten. It has got pros and cons, but the pros are more.