Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We installed approximately 20 Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN in our headquarters and we have a remote site, a satellite office, which has about seven more installed.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is an on-premise solution, but it uses the Meraki cloud portal. We have to register the WAP with the cloud.

In our Satellite office, we have approximately 30 users and guests. We have a guest network that runs through the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and a corporate network that runs through it. Our headquarters network hasn't been used as much, everybody's working remotely over the last year and a half because of COVID. Prior to the pandemic, we would have up to 300 people in the headquarters and guests.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has helped our organization because we are able to be connected to the network while moving around. For example, I am able to take a presentation from one conference room and walk across the building and present it in another conference room without losing connection. This is pretty good for us.

The most valuable features in Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN are that we were able to see all the registered users for each particular WAP, which is a big help. The roaming allows us to have continuous wireless throughout the building. The signal can carry over from one WAP to another. Which is probably the most important feature.

We're are not fully utilizing the features of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN to know a more in-depth analysis of what areas need to be improved. However, the security could improve. It would be a benefit to be able to lock out particular clients that are trying to connect from outside the building.

In an upcoming release, it would be a benefit to have a security dashboard that could show additional information. In addition to our Meraki solution, we have a Cisco product called ISE, Identification Security Engine, and we can detect non-compliant or non-corporate addresses from our network. Instead of using a second product, the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN should be able to isolate the non-specified MAC addresses into the network.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for approximately three and a half years.

The stability of the network is very good. I think we had oversaturated our HQ environment, where we had too many devices in a particular location. We actually had to change some of our configurations because it was causing some connectivity competition between WAPs trying to connect. We had to remove a WAP to allow better connectivity.  

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is scalable. If we needed to expand, it's easy to add another WAP for a new location.

As we come back into the office, in January, we'll start out with approximately 100 users. We're going into a hybrid mode and we will not have as many users as we did, prior to COVID. We had upwards of 300 people connecting and that's mostly everybody with their mobiles or laptops that come into the office. At our highest, it is approximately 300 users but starting in January, we'll probably have approximately 100 to 200.

We do not have plans to expand our usage at this time. However, if we open up a new office then we will most likely expand usage.

We have contacted Cisco's technical support a couple of times and they're very responsive. I would give them a thumbs up.

We used the previous version of Meraki at our old headquarters. The only reason we switched was that we wanted a newer product in a new office. In terms of our office move, we decided to buy all new equipment and that's the only reason we switched.

The installation is straightforward. The wireless portion of the installation took approximately one week. This included  mounting and bringing activating the network.

We used a consulting group for the completion of our network completion in our building. I followed along with them, it wasn't too complex. My experience with the constant was very good.

We have three system administrators, one being myself, and my two coworkers. We're all capable of managing the Meraki environment.

We are on a SmartNet contract. All of our Cisco products are licensed under one contract. I do not think there are any additional costs.

We did not evaluate any other options when we switched over to the newer version of  Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

My advice to other thinking about implementing this solution is to look at other products that are out there. I don't want to say stuck, but we are using all-Cisco products at the time and there are probably products that may be less expensive that could do the same job. We're in contract with Cisco and this is why we went with the newer version of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN when we needed a new solution. If anyone was looking for a wireless solution, look at different manufacturers.

I never rate anything at 10 because there's always room for improvement.

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

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN facilitates daily operations by providing reliable connectivity for devices like PCs and machinery. It allows customers to access the Internet and essential applications without needing Ethernet cables.

The platform's most valuable feature is the ability to detect network issues through a dashboard.

The product's interface should be user-friendly. The integration options with third-party applications need enhancement.

I have worked with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for the past 2 years.

The product is super stable. I would rate the stability a ten.

We work with many customers using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, with deployments ranging from small offices to large enterprises. It is sometimes deployed in principal offices, catering to a user base of 15 to 20 individuals. Additionally, there are instances where larger-scale deployments are undertaken, accommodating up to a hundred users.

I rate the platform's scalability an eight out of ten.

Whenever we raise the ticket, we receive prompt assistance from the technical support team.

Positive

The product operates on its cloud platform, but some customers use AWS for certain functionalities. Deployment time varies depending on the scale of the project. It involves setting up wireless access points, configuring IP addresses, and connecting them to the network. Additional configurations are then pushed through the dashboard. It takes approximately a day to complete.

I would rate the initial setup process a ten out of ten.

I would rate the pricing of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as a five. It could be more affordable than other solutions like Aruba.

Customers appreciate the ease of network management provided by Cisco Meraki's centralized dashboard, simplifying operations.

The cloud-based management has made a significant difference in the IT environment of our customers. It enables seamless access and connection to the dashboard, allowing them to troubleshoot network issues promptly. Customers no longer need to connect to the on-premises infrastructure or use specialized tools; instead, they can easily access and manage their network via the dashboard of any device with an internet connection.

It offers built-in security features like firewalls. We have purchased additional licenses for features such as SD-WAN technology.

Before installing it, the users should consider space requirements, network topology, and compatibility with existing IT infrastructure.

I would rate it a nine.

The last company I was working for did an overall network revamp project where they replaced all of the access points, switches, and firewalls. We replaced all the aging equipment with new ones including Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solutions.

The automatic VMware update is very useful because you don't have to worry about outages and planning for VMware updates. It is very advantageous from a management point of view. The ability to restrict and review the clients connected to each of our segments. Additionally, the solution is easy to use.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve by having more granularity in terms of the data displayed. However, I understand that with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you need to have a compromise point to what are the functions that you're going to provide to the users versus ease of use. More granularity in terms of the data and the things that you can do to the devices would be helpful. For example, when we wanted to make a change, restriction, or segregation within Palo Alto, we can go to the level of detail that we want. The amount of detail provided is amazing, it is very granular. However, it comes with much more difficulty, it requires a technical understanding of the environment compared to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN. 

I used Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN within the past 12 months.

I have not used the technical support because the equipment was new.

We used other vendor devices previously, such as Dell PowerConnect. We were looking for a solution that was easier to configure and maintain while not compromising the visibility of our environment. That's why we chose the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solutions because they have user-friendly dashboards to use the equipment and at the same time, it does provide the visibility that we needed to control our traffic in all our branches. 

When you are deploying equipment in remote areas where you don't have many employees having a cloud dashboard where you can make changes to your equipment easily is a large benefit. Having a centralized, single pane of glass dashboard where you can manage all your equipment in one place has been helpful.

The initial setup was very easy considering it is a Cisco solution.

It took us approximately two to three weeks, to migrate small branches which were quite fast. We hadn't migrated the head office systems when I left the company but that implementation would have been more complicated because that's where the data center is involved.

We hired a network architect as a consultant and that team helped us do the whole migration and implementation. When we were doing the setup of switching and the access points, it require a lot less preparation because of its ease of use. Other solutions, such as Palo Alto, required a lot more planning.

We have 12 branches and our head office and we use one person for marinating and supporting the solution. However, we did outsource the support, we pay annually for support from a third-party company that helps us maintain our equipment. They are on call if we need them.

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

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN was easy to deploy and use, it gives us the functionality that we need to maintain our infrastructure functions, and at the same time, it does provide the security that everybody's looking for these days. We did replace the firewalls with Palo Alto, which gives us another layer of security because Palo Alto's very good in that regard.

We are a reseller, and because we're doing mostly refreshes, we have its latest version.

Its interface is not as daunting as others, which makes customers a bit more at ease.

For Meraki, the ease of deployment and management is most valuable.

Meraki leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the technical capabilities in terms of throughput, spectrum, management, higher-level functions, etc.

I have been using this solution for eight years or so.

Its stability is a five out of 10.

Its scalability is a five out of 10. 

I would probably rate them a six out of 10.

Meraki is probably the most straightforward. 

For its deployment and maintenance, just one engineer is required for a medium-sized company.

The return on the investment with Meraki isn't from scalability, rollout, or saving in hardware costs or software costs. The save is either in terms of the ability to keep the number of technicians that you hire or in terms of being able to outsource it all together to an organization that specializes in it. The higher costs of Meraki are offset by the cost of the people you may have to bring in, depending on your Wi-Fi airspace.

I would advise knowing your use case and matching it to the technology.

I would rate it a six out of 10. It provides ease of management to customers, but it is not for throughput and availability. 

We are resellers and our customers are generally medium to enterprise size organizations. I'm the senior manager and we are partners with Cisco. 

The dashboard is a great feature that is architecturally based and I like the fact that the solution is accessible from anywhere. As an administrator, it is very useful to have access to the dashboard from anywhere through my mobile Meraki app. I can see if there are any issues and can get alerts over my emails. The basic value of the product is the ease of use and ease of access from anywhere. The product is very easy to manage, easy to configure, and easy for our customers to understand. It's the ease of use that sells Meraki. When it's used as a whole stack, Meraki is one of the very good and easy to manage products.

There are a lot of improvements that could be made, especially from the feature point of view. If you compare the Meraki firewall to UTM, Meraki has close to 90% of all the features that UTM offers but there are some that are lacking and that need to be rectified. For example, UTM has a feature that enables you to block videos inside Facebook or block particular applications inside another application. In Meraki, you can only block the entire app or the entire URL. For example, you can block the category video, but not any applications that are inside apps. When it comes to switching, Meraki lacks categories of features, like the traditional Cisco, Aruba, or Ruckus app, and I think they need to increase the number of modules and categories of switches.

I've been using this solution for almost six years. 

 The product is stable and I have not seen any issues over the past couple of years.

The solution is scalable, the only problem we had earlier was the Meraki firewall did not support more than two ISC links, but I think the hardware has matured and can now support more than two ISC links. Some years ago now, Meraki used to lose many customers because it didn't support more than two ISC links.

It's very easy to get support from Meraki, because everything is there in the dashboard. You just need to open a case through the dashboard and you get good support. 

The pricing is a little higher than other similar architecture products such as Ruckus or Aruba. Meraki has a premium pack added to it so it's costly.

If you're a medium enterprise type of organization, I'd recommend something like Meraki, at least from the wireless point of view, because I think it has a very, very simple and easy-to-use dashboard. As mentioned, it's easy to configure and very easy to manage. Wherever there are very low resources to manage a network, Meraki is the one. If a company isn't managing many people and there aren't too many network administrators, it's a very good solution. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

I haven't deployed it for myself. I have deployed it for customers. I work for a systems integrator.

We use it for Branch-type of installations where you have a small branch. You just need to manage it via the internet. You don't need a controller-type of environment there, for a small office-type of deployment.

It's a cheaper resource that helps manage a company's WiFi network.

The solution's ease of use is great.

The ease of management has been great.

The initial setup is easy.

The product has been very stable over the years. 

Technical support is okay.

The pricing is reasonable. 

Meraki is still very much a small office type of solution. It is not a fit for large enterprise networks, as it doesn't have tunneling functionalities. 

If you are configuring Meraki as a RADIUS client, you have to add individual 100 or whatever devices on the site as a RADIUS client. There is no RADIUS proxy option. Therefore, it is pretty much still a good use case for small networks, however, it's not a great use case for larger networks. 

The product needs to offer role-based access. 

I've been using the solution for more than ten years now. It's been a decade or so. I have quite a bit of experience with it.

The solution is very stable. As long as your internet links are stable, Meraki works perfectly fine. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Meraki is not a very scalable solution. It has its own limitations on the number of devices you can deploy. I would say it's not a very scalable solution.

I've contacted technical support a couple of times. They were okay. I didn't have any issues with them; they are fine.

I've used Cisco EROs, Cisco Meraki, Catalyst 9800, Aruba, and Instant Aruba, controller-based.

The initial setup is not complex or difficult. It's very straightforward. 

The pricing is okay. However, they don't have a perpetual license option. Regardless of what type of functionality a customer is looking for, they have to go for subscription-based licensing.

I'm a Cisco partner.

Meraki is a public cloud. With Meraki, you don't have a private cloud solution.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.

These switches are part of our wireless network infrastructure. I have implemented them at 15 or 16 locations, each with between one and seven access points (APs).  

The emailing of statuses is the most valuable feature. For example, if you lose power to the building or you lose your internet connection, you get an email to explain that it has happened. This gives you the opportunity, even in the middle of the night, to be en route to solve the problem before the office even opens up.

They provide good visibility on what's going on.

The annual maintenance is something that needs to be changed.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN products for ten years.

These switches are very stable.

The technical support is very good. They are responsible and knowledgeable. On the Meraki side, you get through right away, whereas, on the Cisco side, you put in a call, and then it is difficult to predict when they will return it.

I have a large number of Meraki Wireless LAN switches including MR12, MR16, MR32, MR42, and MR46 models. I also use other Meraki equipment within our infrastructure.

These switches are very easy to set up, and it is also very easy to upgrade the firmware.

These units cost between $800 and $900 per device and on top of that, you have to pay yearly fees for maintenance. The annual maintenance costs about $75 per year, which is why we are moving away from this solution.

We are moving to another line of products because of the yearly maintenance fee.

We will be implementing Fortinet products in our infrastructure, with FortiAPs and our wireless access points. The speed of the FortiAP is triple that of my Meraki MR, and the purchase price is $500 versus $900. The is no annual maintenance fee on the FortiAP.

Fortinet is up and coming and on the leading edge right now.

In summary, this is a good product but we're moving away from Meraki because we no longer want to pay annual maintenance fees.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our use case is remote clinics. We have over 40 remote clinics, and we even use it in our mobile vans or buses for providing free medical to the homeless and those in need. 

We have a hybrid type infrastructure. We have Cisco as well as Aruba, but from the wireless perspective, it is all Aruba due to security and costs. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is deployed in a data center. We have our own infrastructure because of HIPAA compliance and other regulations. When going into the cloud, you don't know who is managing and whether they properly bedded in terms of sensitive, classified, and not classified information or data.

I also use it in my home. I have a cloud in my garage. I have converged network storage and everything else in my garage. My garage is a data center, and I consider it a cloud. I am using the latest version of this solution.

The ability to manage it remotely is the most valuable. If it has an internet connection, you can get to it. It is a great product for remote clinics. We kind of thought about doing this kind of standalone technology. 

Meraki is easy to manage. From a management perspective, it is the easiest to use, especially in the cloud. I like Meraki. I even have it in my home.

I would like to see more cybersecurity. I would like the ability to go in and enhance security. Because WPA2 is becoming obsolete, many devices are now WPA3, but the challenge is that a lot of devices are not yet there. 

I would like to be able to go in and do monitoring, similar to ASPM. ASPM has the ability to monitor who's joining and who's active. It supports two-step monitoring. The stability of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN can also be improved.

I have been using this solution since it came out. 

Its stability could be improved.

It has scalability. It can be scaled depending on your business needs.

Cisco support is amazing. You get what you pay for. I did a network for the border patrol, and we used Cisco and another product called Antera. From the Cisco perspective, we were able to resolve any issues relating to ring networks, but for Antera, we had to rely on somebody from Taiwan, which was a challenge.

Its initial setup is straightforward. We do wireless on all the access points.

We do a three-year or five-year license and support. Its price could be better, but overall, we get competitive prices.

A lot of times, Cisco puts itself out of range, especially with Meraki. I've dealt with a lot of business development from Cisco, and they have always been accommodating, especially in dealing with hospitals or government. There is also a right time to buy it. July is when they are eager to sell a lot of things because that is the end of their calendar year.

I would recommend this solution if it is right for your environment. I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten. It is great, but it has room for improvement.