We performed a comparison between Meraki MS Switches and Nokia Ethernet Service Switch based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Ethernet Switches solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We are using the MS425 series. We like the ease of use, ease of administration, and central dashboard. Meraki also has fantastic documentation and community. With its central dashboard, we can deploy a generic configuration across hundreds of switches, rather than doing it in the old school way where an individual or a group of engineers would log onto each device via CLI, which takes a long time. So, everything is connected."
"The most valuable features of Meraki MS Switches are simple deployment and administration. You can have all your switches in one place and manage them."
"The product is reasonably priced."
"It is easy to configure and provides complete visibility of the graphic end point."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to orchestrate the network from the cloud."
"Easily installable, with good scalability, stability and technical support."
"We found the initial setup to be easy."
"The performance is pretty good."
"The performance and reliability are the solution's most valuable features."
"On several occasions we encountered major issues with the solution and have found the Nokia technical support to be quite supportive."
"The highest value lies in aggregating the data to improve both traffic management and device utilization, emphasizing the importance of engagement and liability."
"The most valuable features are user functionality and interoperability."
"The most valuable feature is the product's availability."
"The pricing can be made cheaper."
"The solution needs to improve its ability to back up the auto-configuration."
"I would like to add a voice capability to Meraki, to make a call or receive a call."
"The pricing of the solution can be improved."
"Communication of compliance risk is awkward at best and threatening at worst. It needs to be addressed."
"There is not much training available for this solution."
"The cameras should be better integrated."
"This solution is too simple for some cases, and there should be more configuration options."
"I would like to see more collaboration with advanced metering infrastructure (AMI) vendors, such as Itron."
"The solution needs more monitoring tools."
"I would suggest improvements regarding enhancing support response times and implementing user interface modifications for quicker and more user-friendly interactions."
"The segment routing could be improved, and they could also transfer a lot of legacy to the cloud domain."
"I would prefer that all the licenses be open for our use."
More Nokia Ethernet Service Switch Pricing and Cost Advice →
Meraki MS Switches is ranked 5th in Ethernet Switches with 87 reviews while Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is ranked 22nd in Ethernet Switches with 5 reviews. Meraki MS Switches is rated 8.4, while Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is rated 7.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MS Switches writes "They're not expensive and configuration is very easy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Nokia Ethernet Service Switch writes "A stable solution which is competitively priced and offers good support". Meraki MS Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Cisco Ethernet Switches, Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, NETGEAR Switches and Fortinet FortiSwitch - Secure Access, whereas Nokia Ethernet Service Switch is most compared with Cisco Ethernet Switches, Arista Networks Platform, Huawei Ethernet Switches, Alcatel-Lucent OmniSwitch Ethernet Switches and Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches. See our Meraki MS Switches vs. Nokia Ethernet Service Switch report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.