Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

My main uses for Cisco Catalyst Switches are end-user ports, mostly.

The features I like the most about Cisco Catalyst Switches are improved management plane, such as Catalyst Center and integrations.

Cisco does optimize the experience in hybrid and distributed enterprise setups.

Regarding the impression of end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco, I would love to have more visibility.

What I want to see in the future regarding Cisco Catalyst Switches is more integrations between different kinds of products, such as data center and campus.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for over 20 years.

Generally, my experience with deploying Cisco Catalyst Switches works well. New features always come with a price, but in general, it is fine. Since we operate medical infrastructure, we try to avoid downtime as much as possible.

Cisco Catalyst Switches scale quite well with the growing needs of my organization.

I evaluate customer service and technical support as getting worse.

Before Cisco, I considered Aruba and Hewlett Packard.

I have not seen any ROI yet.

My experience with pricing, setup costs, and licensing was not all good. Licensing is quite a nightmare in the Cisco world, and I wish we had simplified licensing.

There are specific challenges that I face with hybrid and distributed enterprise networks, such as the growing need for security, and Cisco does address that. I give this review a rating of 8.

Our main use case for Cisco Catalyst Switches is for remote clinics, remote offices, and hospitals.

What I like the most about Cisco Catalyst Switches is ISSU.

My impression of the end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco is that they have a Nexus dashboard, and it is good.

Cisco optimizes the experience in a hybrid or distributed enterprise setup by using Cisco Edge.

I would assess the operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment as good since we are getting all the information we are looking for.

I believe that Cisco Catalyst Switches could be improved by being given AI capability and advanced licensing, which would be beneficial.

I have been in the industry for around 27 years.

I have experienced some downtime crashes occasionally.

Cisco Catalyst Switches will be supported for the next 10 years as they scale with the growing needs of my organization.

On a scale from one to 10, I would rate the customer service and tech support as eight. My issues with them are that time shifting is an issue and the handover issue is what is happening.

Before adopting Cisco Catalyst Switches, we were using Cisco 4500 and 6500.

My experience with deploying Cisco Catalyst Switches is that it worked well and is good to implement.

Those aspects regarding pricing, setup, cost, and licensing are managed by management, so I am not directly involved.

I considered solutions such as SD-WAN support, edge support, and cloud hybrid support before selecting Cisco Catalyst Switches.

I face no specific challenges with hybrid and distributed enterprise networks, only the downside that RMA is taking time. I would rate this review a 10.

I mostly use Aruba Central, Aruba ClearPass, and the Aruba switching portfolio.

I once provided a review on Aruba ClearPass and I have experience with Aruba.

I don't know products such as Aruba Orchestrator or Aruba VPN, or any others.

I have no idea about Aruba Introspect.

Regarding the features of Cisco Catalyst Switches, I don't have exactly a specific answer to this.

For zero-touch deployment, we have to work around a little bit initially because the switches are not exactly zero-touch provision ZTP.

Currently, I don't see much AI integration with Cisco Catalyst Switches; though they've started, it still needs improvement.

I've been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for almost 10-plus years.

The deployment process has been easy and smooth installation for me.

The time to deploy depends on how big the project is, so we do different projects; small or big, it depends on that.

Deploying a particular switch depends on the day; if you're deploying 95K, that's mostly used as a core switch, then that will take some more time than 92 or 93.

They are mostly used as stable even in network operations.

The scalability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is very much scalable, as it supports the stacking feature and growth; for instance, with 94K modular switches, based on the requirement, we can even increase modules for more bandwidth.

I'd rate the scalability around seven to eight.

Cisco support is very good and responsive.

Positive

We do use Cisco, Palo Alto, and Fortinet.

For a big project, usually three to four persons take part in deployment, while one to two persons will be enough for a small one.

I'm talking about engineers.

From an investment standpoint, deploying Cisco Catalyst Switches offers tangible benefits, including cost reductions; the licensing part is mainly for the SD-WAN feature, but other features are integrated, which gives a pricing advantage.

For pricing satisfaction, I'd say it will be six to seven because Cisco usually is costly compared to other vendors.

Regarding pricing, there is indeed room for improvement.

Customers often compare Cisco with Juniper and HP; those under budget constraints usually opt for Juniper, HP, or Aruba instead of Cisco Catalyst Switches.

Challenges I've encountered mostly involve the RMA part for hardware replacement, which doesn't happen regularly, but sometimes I face challenges due to limited parts in India; they offer different model devices as a stopgap arrangement.

It's quite difficult to specify features I would want to see in future updates because that varies from model to model.

I would definitely recommend Cisco Catalyst Switches to other users.

We do maintenance for Cisco Catalyst Switches.

For maintenance, we usually need three people from different regions working as a single team; our engineers handle both projects and maintenance, so there isn't a specific engineer just for maintenance.

I work with firewalls and next-generation firewalls.

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

We are using Cisco Catalyst Switches for quite a long time, maybe around 15 to 20 years. We primarily use Cisco products for switches in our campus.

We use Cisco Catalyst Switches for firewall purposes.

The benefit Cisco Catalyst Switches brought to my company is that service requirements are minimal. It is easily adaptable to our system. We can easily adapt that switch in our system, in our existing system.

It easily integrates with other software.

The effectiveness of Cisco's software-defined access in our network configuration is very impressive.

The cost of Cisco Catalyst Switches could be improved. For maintaining the brand, Cisco has its own cost structure, which I understand. However, if it has to be much more familiarized in India, because Indian people usually consider cost in their decision-making. If Cisco is able to provide a budget-friendly product, then it will be much more useful. Since it has a higher price, some people are not buying. If it were available at budget-friendly prices, then more people would try the brand products.

We are using Cisco Catalyst Switches for quite a long time, maybe around 15 to 20 years.

There were no challenges with the installation of Cisco Catalyst Switches. It was very easy to deploy. The deployment may require approximately an hour or two hours.

The stability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is commendable. It is a sustainable product.

On a scale from one to 10, I would rate the technical support of Cisco at 10 out of 10. We consistently receive excellent support from Cisco.

Positive

While I'm not from a computer background, as a member of the purchase committee, I choose Cisco products because the name itself is a brand. They maintain their reputation, and there is excellent service available. If any service is needed, we can easily obtain it.

I have not yet used Cisco Catalyst Switches' automation features.

I cannot assess Cisco TrustSec for enhancing security as I am not familiar with it.

I have heard about the PoE capabilities of Cisco for deployment. I believe we have it in our college, though I'm not entirely certain. Another aspect I appreciate about Cisco is that they value women more than other companies, which influences my recommendations.

The stability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is commendable and sustainable. All parameters are quite good. As a purchase committee member in my college, I negotiate and buy good brands. When it comes to Cisco, I don't compare that product with any other. If management accepts, I recommend Cisco products.

The overall rating for Cisco Catalyst Switches is 10 out of 10.

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches for the whole environment across everything including the access layer, core switches, manufacturing facilities, and IT offices.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are reliable. I put them in and they run. They are easy to manage.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are getting better. They scale well because I can simply add more switches without any problem.

There are too many vulnerabilities lately. Too many updates need to be done every week, which is crazy.

I want Cisco Catalyst Switches to be more reliable because in the past, you could install them and they would run for ten years. That is not the case anymore.

Support and vulnerabilities are the biggest issues regarding Cisco Catalyst Switches. All these updates coming out every week create a headache for us, as we have to perform the updates.

Usage went down from ten to probably three.

Juniper

I do not deal with pricing, so I do not have a preference.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are easy to implement. I want Cisco Catalyst Switches to be more reliable because in the past, you could install them and they would run for ten years, but that is not the case anymore. I give this product a rating of 9.

I use one Catalyst Switch as an edge switch and another as a core switch. The setup includes using all the SFP ports, and I intend to fully utilize them in the future. The environment is complex, with various components like virtual servers connected to physical servers that are linked to the switch.

Catalyst Switches are efficient and swift, which is valuable for my organization. I experience optimal speed and effective configuration, making them stand out compared to other switches. The PoE switches offer more ports on SFP, and it is efficient in use. 

Overall, the switches provide me with the value I expect in terms of speed and efficiency.

There could be improvements in the repeat configuration with some file integration that is currently missing. 

Additionally, I must consider the cost and benefits related to the feasibility study of my environment before purchasing the switches.

I have been using the Catalyst Switches for one year and a few months.

Since installation, I have not experienced any performance issues with the Catalyst Switches.

I have not exhausted the system, indicating no scalability issues, and the network growth is supported by the switches. I plan to use all the SFP ports in the future.

I am paying for Cisco support and would rate it nine out of ten.

Positive

I previously used Cisco 3750 switches. I received a notification from Cisco about its retirement, prompting me to purchase Catalyst 9300. Before that, I bought 9200, but 9300 is currently in use.

The initial setup was quick, taking about forty-eight hours to transition to Catalyst 9300. The configuration was done by the vendor, ensuring what I had on 3750 matched that of 9300.

The setup and maintenance are handled by the vendor.

Other switches are considered for smaller expansions like MiniFX yet not for the core infrastructure. I have been using Cisco Switches for over six or seven years.

Before choosing Cisco Switches, it is important to consider the cost and benefits. Proper feasibility studies of the environment should be conducted to avoid underutilization. 

I would rate Catalyst Switches nine out of ten. 

They are recommended for environments where security is crucial and efficient performance is required.

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches to provide network services at the service provider level. They are used for network distribution and to maintain diversity in my network design, including OEM diversity.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are valuable for their reliability and performance. They offer MACsec and IPsec encryption. These switches are modular, allowing for functionality to be configured as required. They are also essential in maintaining network diversity to prevent large-scale outages.

The configuration options on the Cisco Commerce website could be more efficient. The process is not straightforward and takes a long time.

I have used Cisco Catalyst Switches for around five years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are reliable, with good performance and added security features.

I transitioned from using another vendor to Cisco. My previous experience includes working with Juniper.

Although Juniper is cheaper, Cisco provides unique features that justify their pricing.

I have experience with Juniper Mist and Juniper QFX Switches.

Switching to IBM was part of my career transition, and I recommend considering Cisco for its reliability and unique features. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The main use cases we have include network phone and wireless access points.

The features that I like the most with Cisco Catalyst Switches probably would be the access to the console.

I am very impressed with the end-to-end visibility offered by Cisco.

The operational efficiency of Cisco in my IT environment is well assessed.

Cisco Catalyst Switches can be improved in many areas.

We have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches in this company for approximately seven or eight years.

I do not face any specific challenges with hybrid and distributed enterprise networks.

Cisco Catalyst Switches scale well with the growing needs of my organization, and the expansion process was smooth.

I evaluate customer service and tech support for Cisco as excellent.

Depending on the use that we had for it prior to Cisco Catalyst Switches, the company was phasing out one of the products we had and switching over to Cisco.

I believe the product that we were phasing out was Shortel.

I am 50/50 regarding whether Cisco optimizes the experience in a hybrid or distributed enterprise setup. I would rate this review an 8.5.

With Cisco Catalyst Switches, EtherChannels can be mixed with other ports or switches to ensure that users get maximum speed from the tool. The tool also offers VLAN membership. There is another category of products that fall under Cisco, which can be compared with Aruba or NETGEAR.

I work with Cisco products since the tools are very stable. You can manage Cisco Catalyst Switches as it is flexible to do so with the help of CLI. Aruba is very poor when it comes to the area of management via CLI. Users can get backup and restore remotely from Cisco Catalyst Switches as it offers many connections and consoles, like an additional auxiliary port, which is not a feature that others can find in Aruba. Users can migrate switches and routers of Cisco by adding more firmware to add extra features, like voice, that can make the device of Cisco work as a VoIP service. All of the aforementioned stuff can make a very good combination for a company to get a very cheap service with the same device, which is possible because of Cisco, and if Aruba can do it, then it would be great.

The addition of more security and privilege levels to Cisco Catalyst Switches is required as it is one of the areas with certain shortcomings. In my company, we use switches from Cisco with 802.1X authentication and haven't used anything that offers more security. All over the world, everything is open to facing cyber attacks, so there is a need for Cisco Catalyst Switches to offer more security.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches since 2001. I have experience with the product for around twenty-two years.

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

It is a very scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

There are more than 1,600 users of the solution in my company. I haven't used Cisco Wireless Access Points. I use Cisco Catalyst Switches for our company's main servers and a core switch, which supports streaming because Cisco is costly. The product is not meant to cater to users' needs but to meet the requirements of the main servers.

The solution's technical support is great. I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I rate the product's initial setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult setup process, and ten is an easy setup phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in around 15 minutes.

I rate the product price a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price. Though I don't remember the exact price of the product, one may multiply the current prices of Aruba products by two to three times to get an estimate of the price of Cisco Catalyst Switches. Cisco products have always been expensive.

I work with Cisco Catalyst Switches and the whole family of solutions that fall under Cisco, like Cisco's core switches and regular switches, along with all kinds of routers, Cisco ASA Software, and Cisco Secure Firewall, meaning I have experience with everything related to Cisco framework and components.

I have the old versions of Cisco Catalyst 3500 Series Switches, as it serves as a core switch in my company's server room, while the other core switch I use is Cisco Catalyst 6500 Series Switches.

I rate the overall tool a nine out of ten.

We are using Cisco Catalyst Switches for our office network. We have deployed the 9200 and 9400 series solutions.

Cisco Catalyst Switches have been stable, and we haven't had issues with them for the last five years. They also provide good security at the LAN level.

The most beneficial features for our network management are their stability and good customer support.

Cisco Catalyst Switches could be a little bit cheaper as they are very costly.

I have an experience of working with Cisco Catalyst Switches for about eighteen years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are stable. I would rate their stability as eight to nine out of ten.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are scalable, and I would rate them eight to nine out of ten for scalability.

Cisco's support is good, one of the best supports that you will get. I would rate their technical support as nine out of ten.

Positive

We have always been with Cisco.

The initial setup is not difficult for me. The new ones that are coming up are actually easy to implement and deploy.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are quite pricey.

I would recommend Cisco Catalyst Switches because they can scale, and they are stable. I don't have to worry once I install them.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.