Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

We are using Cisco Switches in a data center for access at the core level and the access level as well.

What I like the most is the performance and the latency that Cisco provides.

Once you have the Cisco box, you can put it in its place, switch it on and you can forget that it is there.

The GUI is not that easy. They need to work on the CLI, and to do that you have to have technical resources in-house if you want to do it yourself.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for approximately two years with this company. I have been using Cisco for two years, but in my entire career, I have been using Cisco for 15 years.

It's a stable solution. There are no issues with stability.

There are no limitations to scalability. It depends on what you choose. Once you choose the product you want then collaborate with getting that box which is important.

You need to know what your plan is two years in advance, and how you want to upgrade it. You will need to select the box as it is.

If you make your own selection, there may be an issue. Cisco provides many scalable options.

It has never been a case of getting support from Cisco directly. I have purchased Cisco from my vendor and receive 100% support. I have no issues with support in my city. From whatever vendor I purchase from, I get full support.

The initial setup is not too complex, but you will need to have technical resources if you want to configure it properly.

They are plug and play. You can just plug and start working with it, but in order to use the full features or basic features, you need some kind of technical expertise.

In Cisco, the GUI interface is not that easy. 

If you are not a technical person, you can install it, but you can't use it to its full potential. You will be working with a simple switch and for what you are paying, you won't be getting anything out of it, as it won't be configured properly.

The price could be reduced. Cisco is costly.

Price is a major concern with Cisco. Companies tend to move away from Cisco because the price is on the higher side. In addition to the fees being high, you pay for support which is also on the higher side.

Many companies tend to go with other options because of pricing.

We did a comparison between Cisco and Ruckus because we were looking at changing our wireless system.

We use Cisco, but have not used Ruckus before and wanted to evaluate which was better.

The PoC that was completed showed that Ruckus was more successful and useful than Cisco. Also, the cost of Cisco is much higher than Ruckus is.

When comparing cost, the ROI, and the cost of support, Cisco is way above Ruckus. We have decided that we will be changing to Ruckus.

I would 100% recommend Cisco Switches to others who are interested in using them.

Being an IT head, and running a data center, my top priority is to have zero down-time.

Once you have Cisco, your mind is at ease, there will be no issues.

If my rating is based on technical and functionality then I would rate this solution a ten out of ten. If you include the cost and the support then I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches as part of our network infrastructure at two different sites.

Cisco switches has helped provide efficient and stable switching in the organization. Once configured and setup right they work fine without any worries and has helped free up resources to concentrate on other tasks. 

I love the fact that they can be configured to do exactly what you need them to do, which in my opinion is what anyone with Cisco experience would enjoy doing. They can be set up and configured nicely.

Ease of configuration for none cisco experts would be an improvement.

Pricing can also do with some improvement to make it more competitive with competitor products with similar functionality.

We have been using cisco switches for over ten years.

This is a stable product.

Cisco switches are scalable. I manage two large sites and at the first site, we have about 200 people. The second site has about 300 people. We do not have any plan to expand, per se. I do have plans to upgrade the switches and probably redesign the environment for better efficiency. 

Cisco has a good technical support and I love they way the come in to help when you are doing a research on their site. I have not had any serious need for cisco technical support and so I would not be in the best position to give a conclusive evaluation of this but I must say they do a good job with their certifications so people would need very little of such services.  For a few minor challenges I was also able to get answers from the cisco forums. There is a pretty good database online for any conceivable problems one would face with the cisco switches.

We did not use a different solution prior to this, although we are going to be buying a few Meraki switches that we will add to our environment. We are going to test them to see how well they work with Cisco.

The initial set was complex. When I came into the project, the features were just put in with no consideration, whatsoever. This meant that I had to start from scratch to design the network, draw up the configurations and setup vlans to easily manage the network.

It was implemented in-house.

The price of the product is on the higher side, I feel you pay for the  name of the product as well but it's still manageable for corporate customers. Licensing is simple and straight forward which is something going well for cisco switches.

My advice is that if you are going to be implementing Cisco then you should at least have someone in the organization who is knowledgeable and can manage the features. The alternative is to use Meraki because they are easier to manage.

We have some pretty old switches in our environment and some of them are only 100 megabits. I would like to upgrade them all to at least one-gigabit.

Some of our uplinks are on ethernet, but I want to upgrade them to fiber to improve the performance.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for ethernet switches. We mainly use switches and routers as edge distribution switches. Some of the plants have been with the big pharmaceutical company Aragon. We have also been with a North American company, and others. Most of their switches were Cisco in pharmaceutical company where I worked for 10 years.

Some of the switches in the plants were used as a core. Many of them, especially in Bulgaria and in Europe, I installed myself. Others in America are responsible during the shift time for the configuration changes and so on. They are used in any level, as a Layer 3, Layer 2, whatever. All kinds of switches are used in the different places in our LAN. 

Cisco Ethernet Switches are great devices. I remember when we decided to replace all the HP switches from the American company when they acquired us. We replaced all the core switches with 3850, except in the bigger and biggest sites where we used the 4745 switches. That was great. They are very useful and very easy to configure. It was not much trouble at all and we got a more stable network.

We have been very satisfied with using Cisco 2960 series X with EIGRP Cisco proprietary protocol. This saved us much money and worked very stably.

We also installed 47 and 3850 Switches to the main servers on the 10-gig in some places and Nexus devices using 40-gig connectivity.

We are less in the Cloud because the Cloud technologies didn't work so well. That happened in all of the companies where I've been engaged.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for a few months in my current position but I would say 20 years or more in other companies.

The stability is great. Some Aruba devices are more stable, but with Cisco, we never had problems, with some little exceptions. It is very stable.

It is very scalable.

In this company we have a single usage. I first started with Cisco routers in 1997, now we install Cisco routers all the time.

The technical support for the core switches especially, but for the rest as well, is very good. It's excellent support. Especially for the core switches we had 24/7 support. On some sites in Bulgaria we one time had a problem at midnight and they delivered that switch in time. They brought the switch very fast. Very good, excellent, technical support solution.

Also, with previous accounts with the pharmaceutical company we had access to a dedicated engineer for the project. We had access to their WAP environment. So, all told, tech support is brilliant.

I have used Aruba which is very similar to Cisco. It is also easy to manage and to install. Installing it is straightforward but I don't have too much experience with the priority. We were responsible for their LAN but they have some special requirements which we didn't touch. We didn't use all functionalities in the Aruba. We just used them as Layer 2 switches or as access switches on the main site, and on the bigger sites they had still some old HP switches.

Also, if I remember correctly, Comware had all those old HP switches. We used Aruba just as Layer 2 access devices and didn't use much of the functionalities.

I prefer Cisco. Of course, Aruba is cheaper overall but not necessarily for those small Layer 2 device access switches. I don't know what the price is now, I didn't compare each comparable device. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cisco.

In terms of the initial setup, for me, with much experience, it's straightforward. With most of the switches we had a good team and prepared more than the configuration on the access sheet and then automatically generated the configuration file, just moved it to the note part, visually checking for a minute. Then copy, paste, and done. Start installing. Mounting and connecting. Straightforward.

It takes about one day for the device, if you don't count the cabling and the rack mounting and moving those and so on, and including the break, between 30 and 60 minutes, not more, for each switch. If they are stackable with some stack devices, for all of them, let's say an hour to hour and a half. Not more because we had all the configurations prepared in advance.

I you have a big client or if you have a big project and register it, the discount is good. In the companies that I have worked for, mostly for switching, we had a 55% discount or more. So with that good discount, who cares? It's cheap enough.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are appropriate for small and medium businesses. They also are large enough for our data centers which we had in Tel Aviv, Israel and in California. We had such big devices there.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Cisco Ethernet Switches a 10.

I would advise others who are looking into implementing Cisco to buy and implement it.

We primarily use the solution for our data center and edge switches. Like a lot of companies, we use (in the data center) core switches on Layer 3, and (on the edge) switches in Layer 2. 

Cisco as a whole is flexible. 

The solution can be configured to our specifications.

The solution allows you to monitor CPU utilization and memory usage.

You can only configure both switches and routers via the command-line. They should work to take on the newer HP and Aruba approach where you can configure from a URL or command line.

It could be useful if they developed the GUI interface to enable us to configure all features such as VLANs, port assignment, routing, DSP, through the GUI. That would make it easier for beginners. 

Cisco products are expensive compared to any other solution. Now, there are many competitors that give the same level of services - such as Juniper or Aruba.

We've been using this solution for about eight years. It's been a long time.

The solution is quite stable. Cisco offers very reliable products. All of their hardware is quite reliable.

The solution is quite scalable. However, the pricing is a concern. If I need to add switches, I tend to look at cheaper options like Juniper or HP.

In my organization, there were about 150 switches or more. That covered about 4,000 users and covered both wireless and LAN, wired and wireless.

We may not continue to use it, as it is expensive and there are alternatives.

There are many vendors in Egypt. Therefore, we can always find someone who can help us with technical support.

On top of that, we've found the website to be quite good in terms of finding documentation to help with troubleshooting.

We also use Aruba switches. I've used HP in the past as well.

Depending on the project for configuration, and considering deploying only one switch at a time, it may take about five minutes to handle one switch. Aruba, in contrast, might take ten minutes.  

We had about four people who handled the deployment.

The pricing of the solution is quite high. There are lots of comparable products out there that are nowhere near the cost. 

We're just customers and end-users.

We use Cisco switches at Layer 2 and Layer 3.

I wouldn't necessarily recommend Cisco to other organizations. After using HP, I found that they had just as good of a product with more features and better pricing.

In general, I would rate this product at a seven out of ten.

We are a fiber-optic provider. We have a lot of switches from Cisco and some from Microchip. We have C3750E, which is one of the main Cisco Ethernet switches. All ports of this switch are fiber.

We have a local Cisco partner here who is quite reliable, so we patronize that partner. They do everything on our behalf, especially the licenses.

What we love about the Cisco switches is that they are very reliable. You can deploy them and go to sleep, and you can be sure that nothing is going to go wrong. Our initial equipment was installed by a Chinese manufacturer named Fiberhome a couple of years ago. Their switches were called S engines. They worked, but some days, you just wake up, and the switch has popped up. It was a lot of crisis. Therefore, we are in the process of trying to take out all their switches and replace them with Cisco switches. We are getting good results in terms of reliability and even technical support.

Cisco switches are good as they are, but it would be a major feature if they have built-in routers. Some of the Microchip switches have routers built in the same device. They have a router switch. For some of the sites, we deploy such switches because the client does not want a separate router and a separate switch. So, we go for a router switch with maybe 24 ports. Some of them are fiber, and some of them are ethernet. It would be a major improvement to what Cisco is already doing.

Behind the scenes, a lot of scripting and stuff like this is happening. A lot of workload can be lifted if Cisco had a good GUI. If you look at Microchip switches, they have a good GUI in addition to the CLI.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for four years.

We've been using them for a couple of years now. They have been running from day one after we installed them. Besides general maintenance issues, we never really have to turn them off.

They're very reliable and stable. These are the most stable switches that we have. In a country like ours, Cisco switches are the only devices that have second-hand value. You could go to a second-hand shop and buy a second-hand industrial version, not the small business or domestic version, of the Cisco switch or router. It will still serve you well.

We've not really used much of the technical support even though for the new switches, we pay for it. The main benefit is the updates on iOS. We've never really had a situation where something went wrong with it, and we had to get in touch with technical support.

The initial setup is straightforward. I wonder why some of the new Cisco switches still come with anterior port RS232 and why do they still maintain that. 

Price is a pain point for us. We've lost a lot of bids, and the reason has been that we majorly quoted Cisco devices. Some of our competitors quoted other devices like Ubiquity or Microchip. Some even quoted this Chinese product TP-Link, and they won the bid over us because we quoted Cisco. Meanwhile, the major reason why we quoted Cisco is reliability and stability from day one. They also last longer. The prices could be worked on so that they become more affordable.

We had to deploy a city-wide WiFi network, and we were working in conjunction with Google. Because of the price, even Google recommended a product called Ruckus, so we used Ruckus over Cisco. Its price and license were the main reasons. You have to pay to renew the license every year. Even though you also renew the licenses for Ruckus, but they are much cheaper than Cisco. So, while I would recommend Cisco any time, the trouble remains with the pricing.

I would highly recommend it, especially for people who are doing wide-scale deployments like campus networks or a city-wide network square. 

I would rate Cisco Ethernet Switches a ten out of ten. I don't see any product that performs better. We had a Chinese company coming in to do a bunch of presentations and stuff like that, but at the end of the day, those of us who are at the back doing the configurations understand that it is nothing closer to what Cisco offers.

The use case for Cisco Ethernet switches is foundational networking, which includes packet switching and routing within the organization's network. It facilitates communication between devices and networks, ensuring data packets are appropriately directed to their destinations.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are rugged, secure, and scalable. It provides smart devices and reliable switches.

There are instances where the commands you are familiar with might change or be replaced with newer syntax. They could provide details to know about the changed processes. Additionally, its pricing needs improvement.

It is a stable platform.

We can find references in the product's knowledge base to resolve the technical issues.

The initial setup process is straightforward. It involves understanding the user's configuration requirements. Setting up IP addresses or configuring security features like authentication can be accomplished within three to four minutes. Further, we configure security features like passwords, consoles, and connectivity to help prevent unauthorized access. It requires one technical executive for deployment and maintenance.

The product is worth the investment.

The product is expensive. However, it is cost-effective, considering its durability. There is only a need for licensing in case of specific security requirements or advanced configurations where we need to activate certain modules. We need to buy licenses for wireless controllers or VPNs. 

I recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches to others and rate it a ten out of ten.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are the product line I have the most experience with and have been my go-to solution for many years with mid to large organizations over the years. They are still top contenders for environments that need layer 3 functionality in a switch. They have a product line that covers the entire spectrum of switching technology from the high-end Nexus products through the traditional enterprise catalyst models and all the way down to the small business solutions. They seem to have the market covered with a solution to meet any IT shop's needs.

Cisco switches provide layer 3 functionality on the network taking that load off the security appliance and not requiring a router on the network. This prevents single points of failure for internal data routing and keeps internal routes off the security appliance workload. The CLI is the industry standard and most network professionals learn it and can use it.

The reliability of Cisco Ethernet Switches is amazingly impressive. Maybe I’m lucky but I have not experienced a Cisco Ethernet Switch fail unless caused by a power event such as lightning. I highly recommend connecting switches via fiber-optic connections due to the lack of electrical conductivity. I learned this the hard way when a building with the electrical systems not properly grounded caused a cascade of switch failures during a lightning storm.

The CLI is very valuable as it allows network professionals to work fast and customize the configuration however they need.

Cisco Ethernet Switches have great enterprise features like Cisco DNA Assurance. Cisco DNA Assurance features advanced artificial intelligence and machine learning. Cisco AI Network Analytics, a capability within Cisco DNA Assurance, allows easy management of all devices and services, prioritizes and resolves network issues, and ensures a better user experience across the network.

Also, appreciate the industrial line of switches for SCADA or other environments where switches are placed in unconditioned space and the temperatures fluctuate a lot during the seasons.                        

The typical areas of concern for Cisco Ethernet Switches are not technical but cost including support costs. I’ve never liked the fact that end users cannot download security patches without a support contract. I’ve had trouble getting approval to renew Cisco support contracts due to the cost.

The additional charges for the DNA capabilities of the switches further prices the switches are out of contention for a lot of IT shops. I understand the development of this technology is expensive but costs are sometimes borderline ridiculous.

I have 28 years of experience with Cisco switches.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are some of the most rock-solid hardware I’ve had the pleasure of using.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are extremely scalable and have the broadest line of solutions in the market.

Cisco's technical support has deteriorated over the years. They have call centers all over the world and sometimes the techs experience levels seem to vary. This seems to be the industry standard though in my experience.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches my entire career. I really like them but they are not always cost-effective.

If you know the CLI interface the setup is straightforward. If not you are in for a bumpy ride.

We deploy with in-house talent.

ROI is longer than other solutions in the enterprise space but comparable in the small business area of Cisco’s product lines.

Find a Cisco partner that has a lot of volume and pressure them for a better price. There is a lot of markup on the higher end devices. Plan for support contract expenses for the life of the device. Also check the EOL details prior to purchase so you don’t purchase an older device that will not get the years of software updates and security patches you need. EOL dates are starting to decrease in length.

We compared it to Meraki if cloud management would be helpful. Cisco has more recently started to offer Meraki dashboard management for traditional Cisco switches.

You will not be disappointed with a Cisco solution from a technical perspective. Learn the OS via CLI and you will always have job security too.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in government offices that are in multiple locations.

We have experienced some issues with Cisco SG350 switches. We have not been able to use this switch at normal temperatures as it automatically reboots.

I've been working with Cisco Ethernet Switches for 10 years.

I would rate the stability at ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution, and we have more than 35 customers who use it.

Technical support staff usually get back to us in 30 minutes to four hours. It took them 24 hours to respond only once. Therefore, I would rate technical support at ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. For the deployment and maintenance, we have seven technical and non-technical staff members.

The price is very high though it is priced right for the level of quality.

I would recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches and rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten. However, it may not be as available in certain countries such as India.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in our data center.

The most valuable feature is that we create a network as a villain. For some time, we use a port channel and sometimes, the Spanning Tree Protocol for requests. We search for the user's Cisco Internet switches for small packets.

The technical support has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for six years.

The Cisco Ethernet Switches are very stable and a leader in the market.

The solution is scalable and we have the ability to upgrade our appliances without impacting our services.

The Cisco technical support is good but when compared to other products such as McAfee and Palo Alto they have room for improvement.

For Cisco Catalyst switches, the initial setup was usually automated for large-scale deployments such as Azure, which worked well. However, for newer technologies such as Cisco ACI, the initial setup can be challenging. Once the primary phase is completed, however, the efficiency of the operation requires less support.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We use the Cisco 9200 and 2960 Ethernet Switches to connect our devices to the network.

Remote access is a valuable feature.

Cisco can improve its supply chain. Currently, we have to wait up to eight months for a switch.

I have been using the solution for four years.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We have 1,000 people using the solution.

The technical support is quick to respond.

The initial setup is straightforward and easy to deploy.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.