Meraki MS Switches Reviews

The solution is used for different office locations. The client wanted to have central control from their headquarters on wireless across a number of users, traffic, NMS. It was more of a network and switching type of deployment. They have some applications which they want to track, including how much traffic is going to the user and uptime of devices. For that, they wanted more central management.

We like that it can work on a cloud basis. It gives the customer a choice to be operated from a central location and it can be controlled from there. Our customers mostly opted for having a centralized approach.

It's a proactive approach to networking for IT infrastructure. It will bring better uptime and availability to the network.

The initial setup is easy.

They need more variety in terms of models to satisfy different customer requirements. There are very limited models right now. The range of models could expand.  

They need to work on prioritizing different types of data on the network, whether it's voice, data, video, et cetera. Video needs to be prioritized in a much better way, for example.

If there are certain search protocols added to these switches that make for better network trafficking, that would be ideal.

The lack of availability of hardware is causing issues and bottlenecks. 

We'd like interoperability to continue to be improved. 

We've been dealing with the solution for two years.

The stability is okay. 

I understand Cisco has far more stable products. For example, Cisco Catalyst. That is more stable as compared to Cisco Meraki.

I'd rate the stability four out of five overall. 

The scalability is fine. It's not an issue for us. Cisco is always working on scalability.

I'd rate it four out of five in terms of scalability. This is a new product that is still being refined. However, as they are working on the cloud, it's only going to get better. 

We have around 250 to 300 users based on the switches we've deployed. It's in an international organization with many departments and many levels of people working on it. 

Technical support is good. It is good only for certain areas. Their support needs to be improved to level it out for everyone. Even a premier customer may not get answers within the next business day.

We use Cisco Meraki Switches and Cisco Meraki Wireless.

Cisco has a big problem right now. Their availability of hardware is delayed due to high demand. A lot of system integrators and companies are opting for different hardware providers as they understand that deploying Cisco will take a long time. Cisco needs to work on faster deployment. The manufacturing side needs to speed up deploying hardware to meet demand or they will lose market share.

That said, once you have the hardware, the initial setup is not hard at all. 

We have two to three engineers that can help set up the solution. It depends on the kind of project. For example, if there are four or five switches, so it doesn't take more than two days to settle that. IN that case, maybe we need to have two different engineers: one physically installing the hardware switching and doing the basic configuration and then maybe an L2 engineer who configures things on the cloud and brings different switches alive. We have certified Cisco people. We don't get any problems in terms of deployment. We can also easily handle maintenance tasks. 

I'd rate ROI a three out of five as it is costly. The ROI is not very fast. No doubt they are getting ROI with the cloud-based approach. That said, not everything is on the cloud as of now. The transition is happening very slowly. Some departments and customers are partly on the cloud, not fully. If they're deploying anything like Meraki, they're not getting fast ROI as they're not fully on the cloud. They're not fully utilizing the benefits.

The cost is on the higher side if we are comparing it with Catalyst. It's approximately double the cost. Cisco needs to work on licensing if they want the system to be deployed more. They can have the same set of licensing: standard, premium. Premium customers who don't have any budget issues can buy premium license-based hardware. However, if there are customers who want to deploy good hardware like Cisco yet have budget constraints, they should offer a more affordable tier. 

I'd rate it a three out of five in terms of affordability.

We're resellers. We've been dealing with the 300 and 390 series. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

Meraki switches are appropriate for small and medium-sized businesses. Most recently, I worked with Meraki switches when I was helping my last two clients transition to a new service provider. One is a printing company, and the other is a tourist and convention center. One was moving from Ubiquiti to Meraki. 

Meraki switches greatly increase our clients' security.

I like the flexibility of the Meraki firewall. It gives you the ability to lock things down. Having multiple VLANs is helpful for the switching infrastructure and firewall. It's crucial when you have a public-facing VLAN, a private-facing VLAN, and a secure VLAN. 

The documentation could be more extensive. For example, it could describe more scenarios.  It would be great if they could incorporate AI engines into the switching infrastructure and firewall so you can configure it to prevent intrusion. They have intrusion prevention and detection, but they could enhance it by incorporating AI into their firewall.

The switching infrastructure doesn't need AI so much, but it would undoubtedly benefit their firewalls. That would be enormously helpful in creating the secure infrastructure most clients want. Hacking is a significant concern as the country becomes increasingly dependent on digital infrastructures.

I've used Meraki switches for around seven years. I'm an integrator and a networking consultant. I assess the client's infrastructure and develop solutions for them. For example, I had one client for more than 20 years. I set up their initial infrastructure and updated it as it grew and increased in complexity over two decades.

In general, Meraki switches are highly stable. In one implementation, we had some issues, but that had more to do with how the facility was constructed. Some switches went down. The electrical setup in the facility wasn't as robust as it needed to be, so we had things go out because of storms. However, I've had no problems whatsoever with other clients.

Meraki switches are highly scalable, but I've mostly dealt with small and medium-sized businesses. You need to add enough devices to scale up to a thousand or 5,000 users. These days, that can be challenging because of supply chain issues.
 

Meraki support is fine. Sometimes it's a little slow, but I think that's due to the pandemic. It was superb prior to the pandemic. I rate Meraki support eight out of 10. 

I've worked with solutions from different vendors, including Cisco ASA 400s and Fortinet FortiGate firewalls. I had one client on FortiGate, but I transitioned them to Meraki when they doubled the size of their office. They needed a more robust solution. 

The other client had Ubiquiti in place, but the whole network was cobbled together and hadn't been maintained properly. Their server infrastructure was toast. They had been a client many years earlier. I was called in to remedy their predicament because their in-house support was useless, so we designed some things and stabilized everything. Their security was far superior to what it was before. 

Deploying Meraki MS switches is pretty straightforward if you have a background in networking, and I've been doing this for 25 years. The deployment time depends on the complexity of your environment, but a simple deployment takes less than an hour. It will take longer if you are doing a more complex deployment with multiple DHCP servers and VLANs. 

The switches don't require much maintenance, and you can manage them remotely once they are deployed. It's convenient to have someone on site, but not necessary.

My clients say they're fine with the investment. In one case, I work with the vice president and CFO. He's pleased with it, but I don't have the financial data points.

You can buy licenses for one, three, five, or 10 years, and it's pricey. The hardware changes. For example, you couldn't get the speeds we have today unless you had some high-end internet. 

You may have had a nice infrastructure that was fine for a hundred megabits per second, but the minute you get up to 500 or 1 gig or higher, the infrastructure is insufficient, so you need to purchase new equipment. That's just the name of the game. Equipment and licensing costs go up. I don't know if there's a way to get around that. I really don't think so.

I stopped evaluating other solutions later in my career because I was sold on Meraki by that point. If you spend too much time looking at other options, you don't solve the problem necessarily. 

I'm a tiny outfit, and I was pretty much retiring. I knew Meraki to be a good solution, and I use it personally. It's something I'm familiar with that I can support remotely. If a device goes down, we simply get another one in place, and everything downloads from the cloud. Replacing or scaling up is simple once things are configured correctly and working, 

I rate Meraki MS Switches10 out of 10. I must add the caveat that I don't have experience with hundreds of different solutions. I haven't made a lot of comparisons, but Meraki solutions have worked extremely well for my clients. I'm happy with that. 

If you asked me why, I would say it's the robustness of the solution. Cisco continues to invest in Meraki and come out with new products. Their support is top-notch, and the configuration is straightforward and logical. It's one of the better solutions out there.

These last two clients have been pleased with Meraki, though they also use FortiGate. This is probably their first real in-depth foray into Meraki infrastructure. 

If you're considering Meraki, do your homework. You must have a clear idea of where your client is now and their expectations. What do they hope to get out of the solution?  It has more to do with building a proper client relationship than it does with hardware and licensing costs. You have to be upfront with all of that, of course, because they're looking to you to get that information. You must be thorough in your research and present multiple options. 

We have computers around the school, but we've been cutting down on desktop computers and moving more towards Wi-Fi and laptops. In the dorms, we still have a docking station which is wired, so it's a mixture. The plan is to run everything through the Meraki system, so we can access it and we can control it, whether we are inside the school or outside the school.

As Meraki MS Switches are accessible, we benefit from them as it's quicker for us to identify problems and find solutions, which means the downtime is reduced.

Accessibility is what I find most valuable in Meraki MS Switches, because I'm able to check things and see if they're working, without being on-site at all times. I can, for example, travel across the country, yet I can still check on how things are working, or what's not working. I can figure out what's the problem, what's the solution, and I can fix the problem, even when I'm not on-site. Easy access to these switches has been a great help.

What could be improved in this product is the price. It could be cheaper.

Gaining a deeper access or deeper understanding of certain things, and being able to look further into the workings of Meraki MS Switches, is something I'd like in the next release.

Having bundles in relation to price would also work perfectly for us.

We've been using Meraki MS Switches for three years.

I find this product stable. It's very reliable. We've only had two or three instances when one of the two Wi-Fi systems in our school fluctuated, but I'm not certain what really caused it. It has been relatively easy to fix that, and it could just be a configuration problem.

I don't see any problems with scaling Meraki MS Switches at the moment, but I will know more about it once we have replaced our old switches with this product. It's only then that I'll have a better understanding of its scalability in terms of it being a whole system, rather than individually.

We used Cisco switches, then we decided to go with Meraki MS Switches for several reasons. One reason was that the Cisco switches were originally set up by a company that was in charge of the whole system, which was run from a company outside the school. Then, we had someone come in to take charge here in our school, then we transferred that responsibility to an outsider. I then came in, and I started learning the system, so the outsider became the backup plan. 

It turned out, once we started digging into things, that the system was set up in a cumbersome and closed way, much like a banking system, rather than a setup that would be good for a school, that can rely on switches rather than closing the school into units.

Another reason was that our switches were getting outdated, so we had to do something. We started looking at various solutions, and we had to decided whether to continue the way we were doing things, which we did not like because it was cumbersome and it had to be done on-site, or if we could do it in a way that would be more accessible both inside and outside the school, while having the level of security and stability we need.

For example, we looked at Ubiquiti UniFi which was a cheaper system, but it was less stable, though I know that some schools were using that system. It was really just a question of stability and accessibility, and these were deciding factors in the system that we chose. Even though Meraki MS Switches were more expensive than the other solutions, we ended up with Meraki.

Product setup wasn't complex. I was very surprised about how easy it was to set up.

We implemented this product in-house, with the help of the head of our IT team.

This product is pricey. We are a relatively low-budget school, and for a low-budget school to have a system like this, which is a great help, it means that instead of being able to move faster towards implementing everything, we need to take very small steps. What we should be able to do in two or three years, would take us five to seven years, so the price is a drawback.

Not only do we have to buy the product, we also have to get a license for each annually. For a school that doesn't have a lot of money, that is a problem, but we still decided to go with Meraki MS Switches.

We evaluated Cisco, Fortinet, and Ubiquiti UniFi switches.

We ended up with Meraki Wireless, so we never got to use Fortinet, but we are happy with what we have. As of last summer, the state has taken charge of security issues, so we just follow them.

We set up a new firewall three years ago, and we went with Cisco Meraki firewall. We used to have Cisco and after having looked at various options, we decided on Meraki. The head of school made that decision, because he was advised that even though Meraki's a bit pricey, it's still secure and offers a high level of accessibility to us who are looking after the system, and making sure that everything's working fine. That has turned out to be rather true, because Cisco Meraki firewall has the level of security we are looking for, with the accessibility to implement all the changes we needed to do, and the access to the end points as we needed them.

Since we have a Meraki firewall, it goes through the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, and the rest of the school really just has switches that will be replaced with Meraki MS Switches as time goes by.

I'm unsure about what version of Meraki MS Switches we're using, but it could be the most up-to-date version. It's deployed in the Cloud, so we access the website and control everything through there. The hardware is in the building, but there isn't any specific need to access the hardware, except for the old Cisco switches that we still have which need to be accessed locally. Once we've replaced all the old switches with Meraki MS Switches, which will take us a few years, then we should be able to access everything through the cloud.

The deployment of this product took less than a day, particularly a few hours. The head of our IT team helped set it up, and it was plug and play. We plugged it in, set up the ports, and made sure that everything was working. The product worked fine. There were a few issues to begin with, but those had to do with conflicts between Cisco switches and Meraki switches, because even if they were from the same company, they were still different sets of products. That was really the only thing that took a little time to figure out.

We have 850 users of Meraki MS Switches in our school. We only have two people for its deployment and maintenance. I'm the one who handles it full time, and when I run into problems, I talk to the other guy, then he jumps in. That's all we need to maintain this product. It's being used everyday, e.g. we open up at 8 a.m. and we close at 4 p.m. We use these switches constantly, throughout the whole day. I also use this product when I'm working from home, as I'm also connected to the Meraki system.

We didn't have the need to contact technical support for Meraki MS Switches, so I can't evaluate their support.

My advice to people thinking about implementing this product is to look at the price tag, because in the end, the price will always be a big factor, especially when you have a system, then you buy the hardware, then you need to pay the license for each product annually, as the costs will mount up the more machinery you add in.

I would also tell them the same thing I always advise people when they're buying a computer, and that is to ask themselves what they need. Do you need a secure system, but is not very stable? This is highly unlikely, in my opinion. Do you need a stable system that is very accessible, both inside and outside of a school or a building? What is it you need?

I would tell them from that point, look at accessibility, reliability, stability, security, and look at all the systems that are available. There are at least four or five big names all around. Have a look at them all, and don't just jump on the first one. We all have our preferences, so just keep an open mind, have a look at the different options. For example, I commented about Fortinet this one time, that I like that system, and I think it's a very interesting system, but we decided on Meraki MS Switches and I'm happy with this product.

There's a return on investment because this product is worth it. It's so accessible, stable, and secure, and because it's so accessible, it's quicker for us to find solutions. Meraki MS Switches make things run more smoothly, making these switches almost priceless.

I'm rating Meraki MS Switches a nine, because I'm very happy with them, but I'm very skeptical about giving a ten out of ten. Nothing is perfect.

We are using the Meraki MS120, MS425, and MS355 switches. We currently have a mixed environment with Cisco switches as well as these Meraki switches. We're replacing them one by one to see how well they perform. So far, we have only configured the MS120, which are the eight-port switches. We have some poor equipment, so we are replacing the existing switches. There are fewer network ports that are required, so we've set up these first.  

 We haven't yet finished setting up the MS425. They're supposed to work as the core of our network, replacing the 38 switches that we have on the core. They haven't been configured on the network. We're still trying to just do tests and see if they will work. The MS355 are supposed to be on the distribution, so we haven't configured those, either.

These switches are not expensive and their configuration is very easy. You can provision them on the dashboard, then you just connect them to everything. It picks up from there. Management is easy.

I wouldn't say I'm in a position to talk about any improvements because I'm still learning. We're still on the learning curve, so we have not implemented a lot of the things that we can do with the other switches. But I'm sure that maybe during the course of the next month or two, we'll be able to replace enough of these switches to see how well they work.

We've only been using Meraki MS Switches for about a month or so.

So far, it's been very stable. They run with no issues.

It is scalable.

The initial setup is very easy. It's not complex at all. It's much easier than the Leader switches we've had to configure that required us to learn some commands and so forth. 

The pricing is good especially if you have a tight budget, and you want to implement these. But I guess some people would have some reservations about the yearly subscription.  Maybe they could offer an option of having a one-off or perpetual license to let people test it and see how it goes. 

And then I'm not sure about the compatibility with other models because I haven't tried them to see if they work with other switching models. But I do know that they work with Cisco. With other brands, I don't know.

I would rate it an 8.5 out of 10. 

In my company, the solution is used to connect computers to a network.

The most valuable feature of the solution is device tracking, which allows our company to know where the product is plugged into the environment.

I am sure that my company uses only some of the basic stuff attached to the solution. I don't know much about the higher models or ranges offered by the product.

My company knows how to carry out the setup of our networks and how it works in general. In short, everything in the tool works to meet our company's expectations.

The product's high price is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for over five years. I am an end user of the product.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

It is a very scalable solution.

In Europe, around 2,000 people use the product.

I have experience with TP-Link.

Meraki MS Switches is an enterprise-grade solution that is well managed over the cloud. TP-Link lacks the features that Meraki MS Switches offers, and it also fails to offer proper services and devices. Discussing Meraki and TP-Link is like comparing apples with grapes.

Based on the years of experience I have with the tool, the product's initial setup phase is easy.

One device can be deployed in half an hour to configure the connection with the cloud, and then everything goes on as the product states. Adding one device to an existing environment is simple, but building everything from scratch requires a lot of preparation, so I am not sure about the time required for the deployment from a wider horizon.

Currently, I am not involved in the deployment process of the product in Poland. I was only involved in the deployment process around five years ago.

Securing licenses and devices for more than a year can make the product expensive. In general, the product is expensive.

The product has simplified our network management tasks with a single console that provides our company access to an overview of our whole infrastructure.

The product has been helpful for our company in finding loops in the network. The tool also helps to identify some broken cables because there are testing tools available on the device.

The cloud management aspect of Meraki MS Switches has dramatically improved our company's operations because, previously, we had to go directly to the device to find it.

The product is easy to maintain as the updates happen automatically via the cloud.

The cost-savings from using the product stem from the fact that my company has experienced less downtime, so the business operates without any breaks.

The product is easy to integrate with other software tools.

I rate the product a ten out of ten.

I like the portal, it's really interesting.

The pricing can be made cheaper.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for ten years.

I don't know about stability. But at present seven users are using it.

It is a scalable solution.

I have not contacted the support, my team does.

The setup is very very simple.

It was done with the help of a technical team.

It is very expensive so I want it to be cheaper.

I give it an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a switch.

It's better for small businesses.

The solution is well-managed and easy to deliver.

Its cloud feature and cloud management are great. They are the most valuable aspects.

The setup process is simple.

It is stable. 

We can scale the product.

Cisco gives very good support.

The pricing is very good. 

If they added the option to manage it locally, not in the cloud, it would be better. 

Cisco has to make improvements to the ordering page CCW. If it could be the same as Cisco Switches, it would be way better.

For example, Cisco has a page called CCW where you can put in and order the switches and all other items from Cisco. Meraki has some difficulties in terms of adding its products to this page. You cannot enter it. You can memorize the product number ICQ by name. Other Cisco Switches, without memorization, you can put in them in.

I've been using the solution for five years. 

The solution is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

Technical support is very good. Cisco offers the best technical support.

I'm working with Cisco. That's all.

We found the initial setup to be simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex.

This is an easy product to scale. 

We only use it for a small business, for a branch offices and remote workers. There are maybe 50 users at this time. 

The pricing is reasonable. I'd rate it four out of five in terms of affordability.

The licensing and support last up to seven years. You pay for it once, and it lasts for around that long. 

We did not compare the solution with another vendor as we only work with Cisco. 

We're a distributor and reseller.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

We are using Meraki MS Switches for a company responsible for elections, in our country. We've set up the network for all the servers to work in the same network and they have different sites. We have set up some VPNs between those sites.

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.

Meraki MS Switches could improve if it was an SDN. It will be more flexible and WWE can use one link for specific traffic and another one for other traffic.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for three years.

Meraki MS Switches is stable.

The scalability of Meraki MS Switches is good.

I have used HP and Ubiquiti switches. I prefer Cisco solutions.

The initial setup of Meraki MS Switches is straightforward. The full deployment took about three months. We have different sites all over the country and this is why it took a while to do the deployment.

The maintenance of the not difficult. However, when we order some cards, it's difficult to have them when we want because the hardware supply time is long.

My advice to others is for them to get prepared before starting the adventure with Meraki MS Switches because they are different and the logic behind them I different than what someone would typically use.

I rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten.