Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We use this solution for device address connection.

The ease of use is average. It could be more user-friendly.

The initial setup could be simplified.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for a few months.

We are using the latest version.

It's a stable product. We don't have any issues with stability.

This is a scalable solution.

The initial setup was not easy, it was a bit complex.

We need a team of three technicians to deploy and maintain this solution.

We pay licensing fees.

We plan to continue using this solution and I would recommend it to others.

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight out of ten.

There are a variety of use cases. It is being used in a community center, a school, a gymnasium, and a youth center.

It's a combination of constituents. We have teachers, employees/staff, students, parents, and visitors. We have many different users.

The most valuable features are the multiple types of user groupings and access management. For example: what, when, how long for, what is the performance, and what device are they using are all groupings.

Some of the built-in capabilities need to be improved. The radius capabilities for filtering by MAC address, some of the group-based policy management, even though they have more flexibility.

They need a better reading of device TACs, which are terminal equipment codes.

When you read a MAC address or a serial number, you can detect if it's an iOS or an Android device. Specifically, within the Android world, it can detect if it's a Samsung, an Acer, or if it's a Dell. In the Apple world, you can detect if it's iOS, iPhone, or an iPad.

Their TAC reading and interpretation capability are not as effective. For example, they may be reading a MAC address and reporting it as an iPhone, but it may be a Samsung. It's not just iPhone and iPad confusion, but iPhone and Android cross confusion.

There is a processing limitation when you have multiple SSIDs, above three or four.

I have been working with this solution for three years.

We are working with the original version of Meraki, not the latest version.

In terms of stability, it's relatively straightforward.

It's a scalable solution. It's pretty good.

We have never had to contact technical support.

We work with Meraki, Eero, and Ubiquiti.

The initial setup is relatively straightforward. It's literally a plug-and-play, once you set up on the portal. I would be stretching to find an issue.

Anything that is common to all of the access points is the same, You have to run the cables. Once you have done the Delta it's probably a couple of days to deploy.

It depends on what you want to configure or the level of configuration complexity. We have, for example, access points in a specific location that are broadcasting on certain SSIDs and providing access to only certain users or certain devices, and for specific services which have to be configured.  

If you generate an existing configuration, you can just plug it in and it will boot. If however, it requires a specific configuration, it will take time to configure the specific set of requirements.

We had a deal and we went for it. If I had to go for it today, I would reconsider, unless I get more competitive pricing. The gap in terms of performance, quality, features, and functionality has decreased significantly compared to what it was five years ago. 

Now they have much more. They used to be a startup and they did pretty well. They got into growth mode, VCs pushed them to grow and they started developing features and functionality. 

Amazon bought them. Now that Amazon has its backing, they should be able to grow and improve features, which is going to put them on a similar pedestal as a Cisco Meraki, and the same for Ubiquity. But those are just nuances. 

Today, it would be harder for me to push for Cisco Meraki.

Their biggest challenge is cost. Since it's been acquired by Cisco, it's an even higher cost.

If they are going for the long run it's good, but if you go too long, there is a cost component to consider and figure out, because the cost is something that is coming down with a lot of new solutions.

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We are implementors. We implement solutions for our clients.

All of the compliances are available with Cisco Meraki. For example, you have all of the HIPAA compliance. Cisco Meraki is HIPAA compliant.

Because of HIPAA compliance, it can be used in the pharmaceutical industries.

I like cloud-based monitoring.

The throughput of the switches for wireless could be improved. I am expecting more from it. The bandwidth should be improved. It should be increased.

We have been dealing with this solution for six months.

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

There is no problem with scaling. It's a scalable product.

We have recently provided a client the complete Aruba solution. It's both on-premises and on the cloud, for switching, for wireless, and monitoring. It is called Aruba Central.

I would rate this solution a seven out of then.

I use this solution for wireless.

It is easy to manage and configure. The dashboard of Meraki is easy to use.

Currently, only a limited number of clients can connect to these devices.

I have been using this solution for three years.

Our clients are small and medium companies, and we didn't have any problems with scalability. Our clients may increase its usage in the future.

Their support is great. Its documentation is also good.

I used Juniper Mist. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is easy to use in the cloud.

It is expensive.

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for enterprise wireless and hospitality wireless. We're using it to cater to all customer needs.

The cloud manageability feature is valuable. We can access it from anywhere. We don't have to get customers remote connections, we can simply log in using the internet, and they're easy to manage.

It would be better if they enable full integration with Cisco's cloud-based network in the next release. A couple of years back, we did an integration with Cisco Identity Services Engine. There we had some integration issues. Cisco had access in the portfolio, but Cisco Wireless wasn't fully compatible with that integration. If we sell Meraki, we can't promote some other Cisco products because there's a clash. 

I've been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for around four years.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is a stable and reliable solution. We have a dedicated team to perform maintenance.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is scalable. We have some customers that own 100 branches and they're connected. There was no issue regarding scalability.

Cisco's technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It took us a few weeks to deploy, not much.

We implemented Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as we're an integrator.

The price is on the high side when compared to Aruba. We pay for Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN on a yearly basis.

If you need a simple feature set, you can use Meraki basically without any issues.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight.

We sell and provide technical support for the solution.

We have been using the solution for approximately three years.

I have found it to be stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have 15 employees and we provide support for the solution to our customers.

The price of the product could be cheaper.

I would recommend the solution to others, we have sold it to over 100 customers.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We are a reseller and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is one of the network-related infrastructure devices that we sell. Our customers deploy it where they want to have one single management pane across multiple locations.

The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment.

The price could be slightly lowered to make it more competitive in the market.

We have been reselling this product for between one and two years.

This product is quite stable and we haven't had any issues with our client.

Scalability has not been a problem.

The technical support is good.

I have used Cisco Aironet as well, and I find the Meraki Wireless much easier to deploy.

The initial setup is easier than some other solutions, such as Cisco Aironet. It takes four to five days to complete the deployment.

Our in-house team does the deployment for our customers.

This solution is slightly more expensive than others, such as Ruckus Wi-Fi. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

In summary, this is a good product and one that we recommend.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the Wireless solutions that we implement for our customers.

The most valuable feature is cloud management.

The Meraki platform needs better on-premises management options.

I have been working with this specific product for three years, and more generally with Cisco for 20.

This solution is scalable and we haven't had any issues with it. I would say that it is for medium-sized and enterprise-level businesses.

Meraki Wireless LAN is a stable product.

We have dealt with Cisco's technical support in the past and we are satisfied with the service.

We have experience with similar products by other vendors such as Aruba and Arista, and we prefer products by Cisco.

The initial setup is very easy. The length of time required for deployment depends on the situation at the client's site, in terms of readiness. It will also vary depending on the number of switches and routers that are in-place or need to be installed.

Generally, the deployment will not take more than two hours.

This is a product that we recommend over other similar ones by other vendors.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.