Meraki MS Switches Reviews

We primarily use the solution for switching delivery. It's quite basic. It provides connectivity. They are ethernet switches.

We like the ability to perform data capture and open it with Wireshark in case of issues.

For me, the best functionality is provided by Meraki for any device. The ability to manage the devices for the dashboard online, from the online dashboard. It is great.

The product is very straightforward. 

The stability of the product is very good. 

The switch capacity needs to be improved. Today we deploy some MS switches for the data center. Previously, it was a small data center and we get the most powerful device into the portfolio of Meraki to respond to this subject. However,  it could be great to have a better capacity with 10 gigs or 40 gigs, for example.

As a physical device, it's not extremely scalable.

We started to resell Meraki devices to our customers around 2016. It's been around six years. 

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

The product is not scalable. It's a physical device and therefore limited. 

It's possible when you have virtualization, for example. For VMX, maybe, by the deployment VMX by Terraform and configuration automation, it's possible. However, with the physical devices, and so the switches, with the stack, we have scalability with the ports, with the interfaces, through a new device. I did it to the stack, however, globally, the solution, it's not as scalable as it could be. However, it's just due to the fact that it is a physical device.

The support is very good. We are very satisfied with the technical support we get. They always resolve the issues we have.

Positive

I'm also familiar with Juniper or Huawei. The main differences between them are the facility to configure or deploy, and ease of use. Meraki is a real plug-and-play solution. That's why it's really good. With Juniper in particular you do need strong skills to get the most out of it. 

It's a straightforward setup. It's not overly difficult. That's why we continue to use Meraki. I'd rate the product four out of five. 

The deployment is very quick. It takes only a few seconds to a few minutes. It's very fast. We have developed some API applications to automate the configuration and deployment without using the dashboard. We only need to put up a .CSV file and everything is done automatically. 

It is a good solution, however, it is quite expensive. I'd rate the cost at a three out of five. You do have to pay for the license, however, the licensing is quite expensive. 

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten. We are quite satisfied with the solution genera. 

We are using it for local LAN switching.

Quality of Service is easy to deploy. The ease of deployment, in general, is valuable. It is easy to do port configuration and VLAN assignments.

On the switches, I don't know a whole lot that I would change. Different levels of switches have different layer 2 and layer 3 functionality. It's always nice to have layer 3 functionality across the board if you can, but that drives up the cost. 

They've got different lines for different amounts of layer 3 functionality. However, on their models that do include full layer 3 access, when you choose to use layer 3 on a switch, it doesn't have the full functioning routing capabilities of an MX firewall. It can be limiting in some of those aspects. I have found myself in a situation where I thought I was going to have the ability to do all the routing from an MX firewall, but even on their fully functional layer 3 switches, you don't have that. There are drawbacks. So, it is not just a, "Oh, I can use a switch instead of a firewall for the routing part of it." The answer is, "That's probably not a good way to think about that."

I have been using this solution for six years.

They are rock solid. I've got hundreds of these deployed, and we rarely had any issues. Meraki support is always great to handle advance replacement regardless of how old it is. It is really good.

Their support is really good.

The setup of all Meraki products is extremely simple.

We don't use standard licensing. Most of the time, we use the advanced security model. 

If there is a drawback to Meraki, it is the cost, but you also have to evaluate it based upon the other factors that you do get. Their support is really good; their hardware is really good. The ease of configuration and deployment is really good, but it is more expensive than most.

If you're looking for a solution that is easy and quick to roll out, you can go for these switches. If you want to deploy them without having somebody on-site, you can hire somebody very inexpensively to plug these up and configure them remotely or do advanced configuration beforehand. For deployments of a changing environment, these are the best switches I've ever used.

I would rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of 10. There is something that could be better, but I don't have a lot of performance needs that drive that situation.

We use mobile device management to track our wireless access points, and that's basically what it does for our environment.

It makes the management of SSIDs fairly easy. It's pretty intuitive. I haven't used anything else to manage stuff, so I don't know what other things are out there.

I don't like some of the mobile device management options. They're a little bit hard to find in the system.

I've used the solution for six years. 

It's a stable product. I don't see too much going on with it. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is very scalable. 

I didn't have an opportunity to use another switch. We've been using this since I've worked with the system.

I wasn't involved in the initial setup. I adopted the system. I did not go through the deployment.

We have seen an ROI. It's very good.

The pricing is okay. I'd rate the solution a three and a half or four out of five in terms of cost, five being the most expensive. 

We're just customers and end-users, not partners or resellers.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. 

I would suggest new users get a really good understanding of the network requirements before implementation.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Our Meraki MS Switches are deployed in different environments. Some are in a bank, some are in a dental office, and some are in a business office in downtown Chicago. 

The most valuable feature is the dashboard because it makes it easy to manage all of the switches. It's easy to turn them up and get it configured.

Sometimes the controller in the cloud that controls the access points does not have the most accurate information. There is sometimes a glitch in keeping the management controller that is in the cloud up to date.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for 12 years now. 

Meraki MS Switches are stable. 

Meraki MS Switches are scalable to an extent. I think it is scalable if you are using it for residential Wi-Fi or office Wi-Fi where there is not a lot of complex configuration, I think it will scale well.

Initial setups are straightforward for us. We deploy in many different environments. Our deployment in the dental office took a few hours. Our deployment of about 200 APs in a residential retirement community was probably a month because it was 200 APs and a lot of integration. In other words, deployment can take anywhere from a few hours to four weeks depending on the size of the installation. 

On a scale of one to five, one being the cheapest and five being the most expensive, I would rate the cost of Meraki MS Switches a three. 

My advice to anyone looking to deploy Meraki MS Switches is: be aware of the fact that you cannot activate it without a license. It does not work. There are benefits tied to the licensing. The licensing provides you with maintenance or replacement, which means that it covers you from a couple of different perspectives. The licensing is multipurpose.

I use it primarily when migrating from old or legacy to Meraki MS Switches supporting Meraki services and supporting the SD-WAN. But I am using them with the SD-WAN provided by FlexWare. I am also using it for connecting access points because it is easier than using the Catalyst with a command line.  Meraki MS Switches has its own user interface on its platform. It is easier for configuring the interfaces and monitoring, getting the box and logs from Exporter. We are using it in some regions, especially in the Americas, North and Latin Americas, Asia Pacific, and some countries in the EMEA.

I like that the portal has maps inside it that detect a given location which makes searching on it easier. You can also attach photos to the portal.

The shooting portal side needs to have CLI access for deep investigations.

The most valuable feature is that it is more stable than Catalyst switches. It is easy to configure and claim the switches by their serial number directly from the portal.

In reference to an area of improvement sometimes the switch does not connect to the internet initially. One area that needs to be improved is the issue of the STP incompatible versions It occurs when there is another version of the opposite device. If you have an older version or newer version of the software, sometimes it is an issue that happens with STP incompatible versions for the uplinks. There is a lot of dependency on software compatibility. I would like to see the feature of the Catalyst Switches regarding the LLDB and CDP neighbors to be included.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for the past three years now.

Meraki MS Switches are a stable solution.

The scalability of Meraki MS Switches depends on the compatibility of the version you are working with. In addition, it also relates to a small office or a warehouse.

We have yet to send cases to the vendor.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward and easy. The deployment is pretty fast and takes usually about an hour to complete. We configure the ports, and LANs, you can select multiple interfaces, and configure them at the same time. This is similar to the interface range command line and the user interface, simply connect the internet and everything will work.

The solution was implemented in-house.

It depends on the cost center and the version of switches and their model no, so it varies from small places to large environments.

Meraki MS Switches are more stable and reliable than Catalyst switches. They are an easy product to configure. You need to know the network essentials and what are the IPs. A professional engineer is not required to install them. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

The solution is user-friendly and offers good visibility of users, service visibility and program management. It is easy to handle the configurations.

The setup is simple. 

We have found the product to be stable. 

It is scalable. 

The product is reasonably priced. 

The existing setup is okay right now.

The troubleshooting could be better. Sometimes we get the wrong information.

Technical support could be better. 

It's not perfectly priced. It could always be a bit lower. 

I've used the solution for two or three years. 

It's a stable solution. The product is reliable. We have not faced any problems so far. There are no bugs or glitches, and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. 

We currently have hundreds of switches. 

At this point in time, we do not have plans to increase usage. 

Technical support is not the best. We can't say they are very good. 

Neutral

It's an easy initial setup. It's straightforward. It's not complex or difficult. 

We only need one person to handle the initial setup. 

The price is quite good. I'd rate it four out of five. It's affordable. 

We did look into other solutions.

We have a partnership with Meraki.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for switches. 

The switches are great. The basic features are sufficient. 

The stability is good.

You can scale the product.

Support has been very good. 

The solution offers very good integration potential.

The pricing is fair and offers good value. 

Since 2019, we have not encountered any problems with the switches. On our servers, there are occasionally some bugs or some problems with some features that need Meraki support; however, everything works well with Meraki Switches. 

We aren't missing any features. 

We've used the solution since 2019. We've used it for a few years now. 

For the most part, the solution is stable. Upgrades are typically great. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

We do not have issues with the scalability. It's very easy to expand. 

There are more than 20 companies using the solution, however, I don't have details about how many individual users are at each company.

As we have Cisco Premier, when we have to call them, Meraki is very fast in solving our tickets and definitely was very fast in their support. It's very, very good. We can call them directly and get immediate help.

We pay for the solution on a yearly basis. We pay a standard fee and there are no additional costs.

While it may not be the cheapest, for the quality you receive, the price is very good. 

We are resellers. 

We are a Cisco Premier Partner, and we're trying to do Meraki certifications. It's in progress.

We provide Meraki to our customers, and it's working well.

Meraki's on the cloud. All solutions that are using SD-WAN is managed on the cloud.

Almost all our customers here in the Madagascar area are 49 or 24FP versions of Meraki MS 210. It's suitable for all our customers here.

We recommend the solution. 

It's reliable and I advise others to use it. If they are using Meraki Switches, I recommend them to use also the firewalls and access points. They work well with everything in one dashboard. It's better to pay and have the firewall, switches, and access points together to get a good view on the dashboard and the management. It's better to use Meraki. It is very, very stable.

I'd rate the switches a nine out of ten.

We primarily used the solution as a switch.

The product offered a lower CapEx cost for the appliance. That's why they tried that infrastructure.

It was easy to set up.

We didn’t like the performance, which is why we ended up stopping usage.

We had issues with the stability, issues with the pricing, and the total cost of ownership.

The feature set is less attractive than other or similar equipment from other companies.

You can’t really scale the solution.

We’d like to have on-premises management in the future versions of the product.

It would be great if there were industrial protocols with more on them for an IT environment.

We’ve used the solution since 2018.

We faced some stability issues when using the product.

It’s not a very scalable product.

It’s used for energy generation, and we only really need 5% of our team managing it, so it doesn’t really require that many users per se.

I recall technical support being good. They were pretty helpful and responsive.

Positive

We used Cisco switches, among other options.

The solution was relatively easy to deploy. It was straightforward and not overly complex.

The deployment itself only took a couple of hours.

You only need one person to handle the deployment tasks.

We used an integrator. They helped us manage the initial setup.

We’ve removed all of the switches. We didn’t really witness an ROI.

In the long term, we likely did not get any ROI as we had to buy the switch. We should have bought it a couple of years ago. At this moment, it was a good return on investment in the sense that we had a switch working. However, it was not doing everything we wanted, yet we had it quickly working for low pricing. In the beginning, it seemed reasonable; however, in the end, it was not, as we have to replace everything.

The solution offered low Cap-Ex pricing.

However, it ended up being expensive. We purchase dit as a package from an integrator. There were some extra fees, for example, for maintenance.

We didn’t really evaluate any other options. A company approached us about the product, and we decided to try it out.

We are currently removing our Meraki switches. I’m not sure which version we were using. The latest was likely MS 120. We replaced the switches with others, and we’re bringing in ways to interconnect with other systems, which was providing us with more stability.

I’d rate the solution a four out of ten and advise potential users to go with a different product.