Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

The use case will depend on the customer's requirements. Generally, if they want the access layer, the 2960 works pretty well. If they are in the SMB market, we go with the SZ series which is okay. If the primary use case is more on the PoE side, Catalyst switches give the most. And with respect to two-port, the 2960 is better.

With respect to the technology, when we talk about DNA and SDN as a whole concept, that is where, as a partner, our pitching point is, where we can show our edge to the customer. For example, if we are providing a switching solution, it's not just switching, it's a whole solution with DNA. That is where the whole concept of Network Management and Network Assurance comes in. So Catalyst plays a big role in putting everything together and providing a whole solution to the customer. 

Regarding security, with Stealthwatch, Catalyst switches play an important role as well.

When we talk to the customer, giving a full solution is important. From the switching to the network DNA to the security, I can deliver the whole thing with Cisco. That is how I position things when I go to the customer. We don't just go and talk about switches. We talk about the total solution that Cisco can give.

One good feature is UPOE. Another is having a built-in controller, the customer doesn't have to ask for another controller. For example, you get a built-in controller with the C650. And two-port is one of the premium factors from Cisco.

Something I like about the 2960-XR is that you get a lot of Layer 3 features.

One issue is that the competition is giving a lifetime warranty, whereas Cisco has a limited warranty on most of it.

Also, Dell switching is coming up with a solution where you can put your own OS inside their switching infra. That is where they are talking about open networking. We can show that our Cisco is also an open-source. We are open to different switching operating systems if the customer is willing to put it in. We can support multiple operating systems inside the switching infrastructure. It removes the hardware and software dependency on each other. That is where I think there is room for improvement so we can talk about open networking. Cisco should also come up with open networking access.

In terms of stability, Cisco is the premium solution in the market. It has a cost, but it gives you that stability. That is one thing Cisco has always delivered. That is without doubt, from my perspective and also from a customer perspective. They know that reliability and stability are prime features of Cisco.

I really haven't found any issues with respect to delivering the solution. If you talk about security I would give you a different picture. But with respect to just Catalyst, there are no issues. It is totally straightforward.

Pricing is an issue I have been facing, in comparison with HPE or Juniper. The Nexus series is out of the question right now. Scalability is more an issue on the pricing side and less on the technology side.

I will always tell you to go with Cisco Catalyst 9000 Series. That is the one to go with because you never know - any day, Cisco could make certain devices or certain components of a switch end-of-life. That is always a concern for our customers: "Are you giving me a product that is not end-of-life?. Will it not go end-of-life in the coming years? I need that assurance." I always tell customers to take a device that is very new so at least it's unlikely to go end-of-life in the near future.

So Catalyst 9000 is the one we are positioning because it has a lot of new features, plus it is new in the market. If a customer asks, "Should I go with 3850 or the 9000 Series, I will say that they should go with 9000 Series because the 3850 is an older version and costs almost the same. The 3850 has been on the market for a longer time. You never know when it will go end-of-life in the coming five years or seven years.

I would rate Catalyst at eight out of 10, from my experience. I have mentioned, above, a couple of things that Cisco can come up with, technically as well as commercially. All these aspects lead me to rate it an eight. Those technical and commercial differences mean we have to work hard.

• Security
• Configuration

At first glance this switch looks exactly like the an Ethernet switch, I would recommend that there be verbage in the documentation on exactly what gbit connectors are required.

We've been using it for eight years.

There have been no issues with the deployment.

The stability has never been an issue.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

It's great.

It's great.

We didn't have anything in place and needed a fiber solution.

It was very straightforward.

We did it in-house with help from the vendor.

There were no other options looked at.

Make sure you get the right connectors.

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches for the connectivity of my client's local area network.

I have found that the protocols that Cisco Catalyst Switches support are beneficial for my customers.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for approximately one year.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is a stable solution.

I have found Cisco Catalyst Switches to be scalable.

We have five customers using Cisco Catalyst Switches.

The support from Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

Cisco Catalyst Switches has a straightforward installation.

The pricing of Cisco Catalyst Switches could be better in general. There is an annual license required.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of ten.

The solution has been issue-free.

The solution is scalable.

The stability of the product is good. We've had no problems whatsoever.

Overall, the pricing has been good.

Technical support is very helpful, even during implementation.

The initial setup is simple.

There are some models that can occasionally cause problems. If a particular switch is made for some specific use case or a particular environment, if you put that in other types of infrastructure or use cases, then you may face problems.

The licensing process could be a bit less complex.

We have dealt with the solution for about three years.

The stability has been good overall. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance has been reliable. 

The scalability has been good. If a company needs to expand it, it can. However, you do need to have the right model, otherwise, you run into issues with scaling. 

We have 15 to 20 clients that use this product.

We have good technical people and an experienced technical team who can install those switches, and do a level of troubleshooting and escalations.

For five years, we've used Huawei. Three years ago we started with Cisco. This was mostly due to networking, as we don't have a team five years back. After that, we got the team specifically for networking and we started that with Huawei, and we got a very good response in the market. Unfortunately, due to the Chinese market, and all that stuff, that didn't last. That said, the customers who are using the technology, are still happy with the support as well as with the product.

We also occasionally use Aruba.

We didn't work with Juniper as an installation system integrator, however, we have with Cisco (including Nexus and Meraki) and Huawei, and we have had a very good experience. 

The initial setup is good. It is easy. If you know the commands, even basic commands, you can do the normal installation. If you want to go for V-LAN and other things, routing, et cetera, level three switches kind of installations, then you may need some time and knowledge. 

For deployment and maintenance, you need a minimum of two people. Three or four is also good if it is enterprise. There are some customers where we have to do installations at three or four sites simultaneously and we have to complete that within one or two days or within a specific downtime. If the network is down, everything is down. That is when you require multiple team members. Otherwise, if that is one site and one installation with one day's worth of downtime, with two people, you can do it easily.

Support is helpful in regard to the implementation process. My team didn't find any issues with installation.

The solution's pricing is pretty good. As far as whatever else is available in the market, for example, if you compared it to Aruba, Juniper, or other enterprise solutions, the pricing is reasonable.  

You do require licenses. There are some licenses that you need to procure separately. By default, the licensing process is good.

Everyone has their own licensing structure. With Cisco, once you do a setup two or three times, the process gets easier and the licensing gets clearer. Until then, licensing is a little bit tricky.

We do not use the solution in our office, however, as Test System Integrators, we have provided the solution.

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. It's been quite good overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

We use Cisco Catalyst Switches for networking.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are the best overall.

I have been using this solution for approximately six years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have approximately 25 customers using the solution.

The technical support from Cisco is very good.

The installation is easy if you understand the Ciscos CLA interface and your infrastructure is correct.

We have CCNA and CCNP certified engineers that do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

The price of a Cisco Catalyst Switches license is expensive. 

There is a big problem with their pricing structure. For example, there is a system called first come first serve metric for integrators. The person who logs the case gets a better price than what I receive. They give discounts to other people, such as those with certifications, and what happens is people go away from this solution because of it. I do not receive a better price which puts me in a position to promote other solutions. 

I lost a large contact because of their pricing structure. Cisco should give the same pricing to everybody.

I recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our network.

I am a system engineer, and we sell the products to our customers.

I like the flexibility of this product.

There is a complexity with Cisco.

They should have unified software that includes all of the licenses. We should not have to pay for different software on the same platform. Each one has a specific use or a specific feature.

If you need dynamic routing then you have to purchase the software, if you need basic IP routing, you need different software. Why do you need this type of complexity?

They have their own propriety protocols while other competitors go with other standards and are easy. Cisco is a bit complex.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for 15 years.

We use several different versions, not just one. If they have different software for universal enterprise services, they will have specific features to use for the specific use case.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is a stable product.

The scalability of this solution needs to be improved. It is not very scalable. For example, if you want to enable the features such as VSS, you have to add other modules and hardware.

Other competitors have this feature available from the beginning. 

Technical support is fair.

The initial setup is straightforward. It is easy to install.

I was not involved in the installation but it is approximately five or ten minutes to deploy.

There is no licensing fee. All of the features are available on the switch from day one.

It's not a complicated license; you have to buy a license for different services or features. This is different.

Most of the features are available without additional hardware.

I would recommend Cisco to other users, along with several other products.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to provide stability between sites. Also for our customers who have multiple branches, Cisco routers and switches are perfect for them. 

As far as technology is concerned, Cisco improves the client-to-client business.

Cisco should support all of the features that are included with the suite.

I have been using Cisco products for more than six years.

I am using the latest version of Cisco Catalyst Switches.

They are very stable.

Cisco Catalyst switches are definitely scalable.

There are a number of models and scalability depends on the requirements. You have to consider how far you want to scale your organization with the different branches.

I work with many different organizations and many different users. Some have 6,000 users whereas others have 3,000.

Technical support is good. Cisco offers the best possible support.

As for the new products that Cisco has acquired it's okay, but not as good.

Previously, I have used Linksys and Meraki Switches.

It's easy to install. 

If you have clear knowledge and design, it's pretty easy to implement.

The time it takes to deploy depends on how large the site is and a number of things. If everything is available it can be configured in minutes.

The size of the technical team depends on the installation and what the customer requires. For the deployment, if you have different sites you will need more people, a larger team. It also depends on the timelines and how soon you have to hand over the project to the customer.

Essentially, it depends on the circumstances.

Price is an area that can be improved. Cisco is pioneering technology and they are definitely charging for their technology.

It would be great for the user if Cisco lowered the prices for their routers and switches.

The price is not really in the market. When the new product line arrives, it's still very expensive. The product has new features, new capabilities, and definitely costs more than the previous one.

The price could be cheaper. Many other vendors provide the main features with lower pricing and better performance than Cisco.

Overall, Cisco prices are high.

We have plans to continue using this product and would recommend them to others.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution specifically for our internal network - for our users and some servers. We also have servers on the cloud as well, although largely we are on-premise.

The VLANs portion of the solution is very good. 

The product offers very good routing and ranking capabilities.  It allows for better channels.

The initial setup is very simple. An organization shouldn't have too much trouble setting everything up.

We've found the solution to be rather stable. It offers good performance.

There aren't any features that are lacking from my perspective. It's pretty complete.

The solution itself is quite expensive. It would be ideal if they could lower the pricing a bit.

The product could offer more integrations with other solutions. 

I have had experience with the solution since around 2000. In 2010 I began on the sales-side of the product. Therefore, I have many, many years of experience with the product at this point.

The solution offers very good stability. We've found it to be reliable. It doesn't crash or freeze. It also doesn't seem to have bugs or glitches that affect its performance.

The scalability depends on the layer you are talking about. Layer 2 is not scalable, however, Layer 3 switches offer very good scalability.

We have about 50 people currently using the solution.

We found the implementation to be very simple, and straightforward. It was easy. There weren't any complexities, therefore, we didn't face any difficulty when setting everything up.

Deployment takes a few hours.

The pricing of the product is quite high. It's not the cheapest option on the market.

We're Cisco partners. We have a business relationship with the company.

I'd recommend this solution to other organizations. Over the years, I've found that it works very well.

In general, on a scale from one to ten, I would rate it at a nine.