While the graphical user interface is user-friendly and easy to configure, I see room for improvement in integration with third-party tools. We haven't had any integration issues, but potential limitations with third-party integrations could be an area to enhance. View full review »

It supports user-based policies. They could include bandwidth-based policies.

View full review »

Cisco manages company networks or remote sites. With traditional systems, you need to configure the WLC, often on-premise or on a virtual machine. Then, you deploy the access points and configure many settings through a console, pushing the configuration to each access point. If you want to integrate with Cisco CyberArk, additional configuration for the Cisco Campus is required.

You can prepare your configuration, including VPN settings, in a unified interface. You can push your configuration quickly; if it doesn't work, you can easily retrieve and modify it. This streamlined process allows you to test configurations efficiently and deploy them rapidly, often within minutes.

The difference between the two systems is substantial regarding configuration time, testing, and deployment. Cisco Meraki offers significant time savings and ease of use compared to traditional systems. Additionally, the budget and resource requirements for managing these two models are very different, with Cisco Meraki often being more cost-effective and simpler to manage.

If Cisco Meraki Systems Manager integrates with other solutions or models, such as ACA's radio solution, on the same equipment or within the same cloud environment, it will offer significant benefits."

View full review »

Meraki Systems Manager lacks scripting capability compared to Workspace. I've seen the product focused mainly on mobile solutions. They might need more development in endpoints like Windows desktops. They seem to be progressing in that direction, but compared to Intune or Workspace ONE, designed specifically for endpoints, those might deliver better results with computers. Meraki seems to have started more as a mobile solution, perhaps as a casual endeavor, but they are exploring broader possibilities in this area.

View full review »

One area for improvement in Cisco Meraki Systems Manager is the ability for more advanced users to make detailed and non-standard changes. It can be a bit challenging to customize things beyond the standard options. However, this simplicity can also be a strength for those who prefer an easy-to-use interface. Over time, more features are being added to the user-friendly front end, reducing the need for advanced customization.

View full review »

Sometimes, the integrations are a bit tough. It might require some technical information.

View full review »

I've participated in numerous product launches primarily focused on HP and Dell. Consequently, there should be a vested interest in local gatherings to showcase product advantages and performance. Particularly in Singapore, it only has so limited integrators to engage in IP product sales. There's room for improvement through dedicated workshops and training. The European and Western markets differ significantly from the context here. The physical location holds more importance. Thus, they should have a survey to evaluate demand, supply, and sales points, tailoring strategies accordingly.

View full review »

There is room for improvement in terms of pricing. If they could offer a more competitive pricing structure, it would make the solution even more appealing. A more affordable cost would likely attract a broader user base and enhance the overall value of the already robust Meraki system.

View full review »

There is room for improvement in the technical support.

In future releases, we would like to see less subscription costs. 

So, we would like to see more cloud-based features and fewer subscriptions.

View full review »

Meraki is limiting our connections. We have more network ports and equipment than Meraki has set for us. Meraki has set a limit of two ports, while we need four.

View full review »

There are problems with the connection on the client side, and the app that was deployed could be better. It probably had a few bugs because it needed all the synchronizations to be clean, and that was user-enabled. It would be better if the administrator could control this because you wouldn't be dependent on the user or need to prompt them to update the device and could see the status from the administrative cloud dashboard.

View full review »

Linux compatibility needs improvement. The datasheet, the instructions, and the documentation say it works with Linux. However, we haven't had a great experience getting it to work. It works very well with Microsoft, however. We need better workability on Linux. That's something that maybe they maybe want to improve.

View full review »

Security could be improved, and there could be more features that enable you to customize the end customer solution.

There is not a lot of good sales and technical organization in general, so it's difficult to have support.

View full review »

Cisco's authorized scripting can be complicated. For example, we sometimes enter the wrong code using this script, and then we had to dictate to find the problem.

View full review »

The price of the solution could be reduced.

View full review »

The cost of the solution is a bit high. There are other cheaper options on the market.

Right now, all the attention is going only to the Apple devices. They need to allocate more energy in terms of their offering to devices that are not Apple devices.

View full review »

I would like for it to be like Cisco where you can monitor the end users one network. 

View full review »

We have used it for too short of a time to have thoughts about what might be missing; we still need to get more familiar with it.

The solution can be expensive. 

View full review »

We've used the iOS client. The Windows client has a lot to be desired to be a full management tool. 

We first tried the Windows client, but quickly determined that it wasn't going to cut it for most Windows cases. The Windows portion of this product needs improvement.

View full review »

The tool's pricing needs to be more flexible like Cisco's. 

View full review »

In my opinion, the equipment availabilities and competitive pricings could be improved.

View full review »

I would like the system's compatibility with Google Chrome to be improved.

View full review »

The cost of installing this solution can be more expensive depending on who is doing the installation. Cisco is very expensive, and I'd like to see a reduction in cost.

View full review »

Because Cisco has improved a lot and is competing with other technologies that are innovative and brand new to the market, the only improvements they have to make are to keep up with the current competition and remain competitive with other solutions.

View full review »

The one particular issue that we had is that one of our sites had a very specific VPN site-to-site setup for access into a a particular client. We could see what was coming out of the firewall, and for some reason, the client firewall was not responding in the way that we were expecting, and we were unable to get client's firewall team on the line in time for us to get it all straightened out, so we had to fall back to the ASA that was in place.

View full review »

Integration with other tools, such as, ConnectWise Automate.

View full review »

Geofency polices are great, but it depends on how the device has the localization services configured. If the device is not getting the right GPS position, Geofency polices will fail.

View full review »

The solution's integration with other products could be improved.

View full review »

Cisco could add SOC services.

View full review »

It would be beneficial to have better integration with other operating systems. For example, some customers use Chromebooks and other versions of Windows, Linux, especially in educational institutions like schools here in Brazil. It would be advantageous to expand its compatibility to include other commonly used operating systems.

View full review »