Meraki MS Switches Reviews

I am using it to put it in a secure end-to-end solution in my IT lab. I am using MX65. I have got three Meraki solutions. I have the switch, the access point, and the appliance itself.

Being able to look at every port and see what it is connected to is very useful. Everything seems to be running really well. They've got everything covered.

They have a really cool mounting system at the bottom and an access point that you can use to level up your device. It is kind of cool.

It would be great if they can get the price down for small businesses.

I have been using this solution for three years.

It is rock solid.

They are after a certain market, that is, the small business market. You wouldn't put a Meraki solution at an enterprise level. That's not the market that they want to go after. You would probably scale up to full Cisco for that.

They've always been really good. To be able to get somebody at the end of the line is the real advantage of having a subscription-based solution. I had to wait for maybe three minutes at the most.

You can initiate a service request from the device itself, which is something that not too many companies do. When you're logged into the interface, you can see who your rep is. You have full connection to support. If you want to learn how to configure VLAN, you just click on the support ticket, it generates a ticket. It figures out your number and other information and sends an inquiry ticket with Meraki, and they call you back.

I have used a lot of stuff at the lower end, such as SonicWall, Linksys, and TP-link. I have also used the actual Cisco stuff, but it just never worked together. I haven't worked with Ubiquiti, but I believe that they've got a similar product. I haven't been hands-on with Fortinet, but I understand that they have a quite selective setup as well.

In terms of security and intelligence, Linksys and other such solutions tend to be more for the home business, so they are not really competing with each other. Ubiquiti competes with them, but I haven't worked with Ubiquiti.

Its setup is very easy. A kid could do this stuff. It is cloud-based. There is one interface for all three devices. They are all tied together under a web console.

I configured it myself, and I am not a real techie guy.

You need one person for its maintenance. I pretty much do it all myself.

They can get the price down for small businesses. The way I bought it, I paid hardly anything, and I got all my licensing with it.

The firewall appliance is around $900, and the switches are around $150. This is for the device itself. For licensing, I signed at $70 or something like that for the switch. Technical Support is included in this.

I wouldn't try and manage any piece of Cisco equipment by itself. You wouldn't want to just buy a Meraki Switch. You wouldn't be able to access it the same way as your firewall. It is only when you start off with an MS cloud appliance, you can add on the Meraki stuff.

I would rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten. They are a good rig.

The use case is small to mid-sized offices, under 500 ports.

The upgrades to the portal made it easier to manage the switches. The flexibility of the configurations is great — there are multiple configuration styles relating to deployment. If you're going to do Layer 3 at the edge, you're going to do Layer 3 at the core. The flexibility of the devices is very good.

The most valuable feature about Meraki is the console. The second most valuable feature, to me, is the technical support and the infrastructure behind the console.

I think their feature set is far better than most

The biggest area that they fall short on is comparing the performance. I don't have the articles in front of me, but the performance of a Cisco Meraki Switch versus some of the other devices that are more expensive or are equally as expensive as Meraki, they're falling short on the performance, because you're paying so much more money and they're not performing better.

That is a big problem when you talk to clients who've researched this. If ease of use and flexibility is important, I usually forego the high-end performance for the money. The performance is not bad, but let's say I bought one of the other Cisco switches or Juniper switches — they perform better for the same amount or even less money. That's a big drawback.

They need to work on the performance. Maybe the chipset that they're using is not as good as Juniper, for example. But their goal is not performance, it's consistency. If you're about consistency and ease of use, Cisco is definitely better. If you're about performance, that's where they fall short.

Keep in mind, that's my opinion; someone may argue differently with me — that Meraki is not better. It's not slower or less performance-optimized, but it's something I come up against when I discuss it and offer it as a solution versus Juniper or some other devices.

I want to use Meraki because I want to be able to plug it in and set it up in 15 minutes. Then when I have to troubleshoot something, it's easy. When I have a problem with the network, I call them up and they help. They actually help. You call up some of these other vendors, they're like, "Huh? Oh, you got to do all this stuff." I'm like, "No, no, no. Let's look at the logs together. Then you tell me what you see. And then I'll fix, or I'll adjust, or we'll replace." I don't want to go through this whole story and song and dance as I did with HP. So it's a problem.

Cisco overcomes that, but performance is where they get hurt. When you talk to any of the other guys that do network architecture, they're like, "Well, we're not going to pick Cisco Meraki. We're going to pick the other Cisco switches, or we're going to pick Juniper, or we're going to pick something else, but we're not going to go with Meraki." I'm like, "Okay." But in a small to medium-sized business, you can't beat them. 

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for four to five years.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MS Switches a rating of nine. The only drawback is the cost — that's what kills them.

I am not paying for the equipment; someone else is paying for it. Someone has to be willing to pay the premium for that and they have to see the value. I'm not a salesman, but if I want to go with Cisco, I have to show the client that if they buy Cisco Meraki versus Ubiquiti, they're going to do better.

We are using these switches to provide internet access to our users. They connect the access points.

The dashboard and the interface, in general, are good features. We can work globally and anybody can log in from our web-based console to use it. Everything from switches to access points can be used from a single dashboard.

We had some dashboard licensing issues, maybe because their method of collecting data from the user needs to be more streamlined. It seems that they have collected information from the vendor, but perhaps there is not a proper SOP regarding this.

They collected some vague information that was registered and when it came to us, we found out that they didn't use our proper email address. As a result, licensing became an issue. It was only resolved after we contacted them and changed the details of the registration. Consequently, there was a long delay before we started using it.

When I registered the system in India, there was no problem. However, in the UAE, the vendors were not collecting and properly verifying the details. The need to streamline the licensing data collection process to fix this.

As a manufacturer, or OEM, they might be doing their part correctly, but the vendors might be losing the data. So, they need to be strict on their vendors to collect the information properly. Or, they need to at least contact the people, the end-users, and verify that it is correct. As it is now, they just depend on the vendors' data. Before they register it, they need to contact the customer directly with the data and verify it. Ideally, some kind of SOP should be there.

With no SOP in place, the question becomes one of what happens when Cisco takes the data from the vendor and registers the product, but doesn't verify it by contacting the customer. This can happen in cases where the vendor is in a hurry to sell the product. In fact, they might fill in bogus data and give it to Cisco. Then, once the customer gets the product and starts to configure it, they get the licensing issue like we did, which is the first step in the process. The fails only because the data given by the vendor is wrong, and it's not the fault of the customer.

If instead, Cisco verified the details with the customer again, once they receive the data, it would be better. As I suggest this, it might seem like a slow process, but in today's world, it is not. They can contact the customer directly, using the provided email or mobile number. They can call them, verify the details, and it will be good for both Cisco and the customer.

We have been using Meraki MS Switches for approximately six months.

It is pretty stable so far, but we really only just started using it so I may have more comments in another year or so.

Scalability is something that we'll determine in the long term. At this time, we have between 30 and 50 users. It can scale up to 60.

I have not yet dealt with technical support.

Previously, we used MR access points and we liked the user interface. We wanted to extend that to our switches. At the time, the switches were web-managed but they were not under the same dashboard. Switching to Cisco and Meraki brought everything together, from switches to access points, into a single dashboard.

I was involved in the installation and found that it was straightforward. The deployment took between one and a half and two hours, although we still had the problem with the licensing. That was a long wait.

Our deployment team consisted of three people. There was one person on-site, another in India, and one in the UK.

We are just about to do some configuration with these switches.

This product is quite expensive. The vendor might be cashing in on the dashboard because it's attractive, and nobody else is providing such a sophisticated dashboard. It has the IP, switches, routers, security cameras, and everything else included in one place. So, while the product is expensive, the features they provide are unmatchable.

This is a product that I recommend for others.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

I use it in conjunction with Meraki Firewall and Meraki AP as a package. I am using the latest version of this solution.

We mainly replaced a number of Cisco ASA 5505 Firewalls that had PoE on them. The new Cisco ASA 5506 Firewall and Meraki MX Firewall don't have PoE, but we needed ports and PoE. Therefore, we combined the switches with the firewalls. The clients already had Meraki APs, so we just plugged in Meraki switches. 

The improvements are mainly from the help desk perspective. It has been very useful for the help desk. Previously, the whole setup was Cisco. It was Cisco ASA 5505, so there was no real GUI. We only had the command-line interface to go in and look at it. Now we can look at the entire location in one piece on the dashboard.

A lot of our customers are small to medium businesses, doctors, and lawyers. The Meraki dashboard allows our help desk to quickly view a customer's location.

It is easy to deploy, maintain, and update. It has been trouble-free so far.

I am still a Cisco command-line bigot, but the web interface makes it a lot easier for our help desk to interact with a client. When the clients call in and say that they aren't able to connect, it takes the help desk 10 minutes or less to look at everything in the enterprise or location. They can look at the firewall, switches, or access points in the dashboard. That's why I like the dashboard.

It would be good to include the command-line access someday.

I have been using this solution for a year and a half at the most.

It has been stable so far. I haven't had any problems. 

Its scalability is good. It is good for small and medium businesses and locations. They can scale up to good throughput. 

In terms of the number of users, all employees of a client are the users of this solution. All PCs are plugged into Meraki. All wireless devices are coming through them.

I had to call them a number of times. I always got great support from Meraki. I would rate them a nine out of ten.

We mainly used Cisco products, which could be managed only by using the command-line interface. We switched mainly because of the dashboard. 

If I am going to put something in the enterprise, I'll go with a full Cisco switch. If you buy the full Cisco switch, it comes with a lot of features. I won't put a Meraki switch on top of the rack of a whole enterprise or a whole bunch of blade servers kind of setup. Meraki is great for small and medium businesses and locations.

The initial setup is easy. I can send Meraki Firewall, Meraki AP, and Meraki Switch to a client and have them plug these in. They'll pop up in the dashboard as long as you've done a few things correctly. I can customize a switch in England from Upstate New York. This is what is great. You cannot do this with a full-blown Cisco switch. You have to configure it, put it in a box, put the tray, and roll with Meraki.

Its price is definitely competitive.

I would recommend this solution. It is easy to deploy. You can put it in a box or have it shipped to a client's remote location. Even if they don't know anything, you can talk to them and set it up easily.

I would rate Meraki MS Switches a nine out of ten. I am very happy with all Meraki products that I use. 

All of our endpoints are connected to our servers via the Meraki switches. Every user goes through them and it mirrors a cloud portal that allows you to administer it.

It hasn't really improved the way our organization functions. It's very similar to any other switch that I've used, although it is easier to manage than other switches.

The licensing model needs to be improved. The way they license their products, I'd rather just pay for a device by the device, and not have to pay annual subscription fees.

We have been using Meraki MS Switches for about two years.

This product is very stable.

This is a scalable solution and everybody in the organization uses these switches. This includes the president and CEO, the business development underwriters, and everybody else. In total, there are about 75 users.

I have not used their technical support.

Prior to Meraki, I used HP switches. I changed because they were too old and it was time to replace them. They were at the end of the normal lifecycle and Meraki had some great reviews, so I figured that I'd try them out.

The initial setup is straightforward.

My advice for anybody who is implementing this product is to do your research to make sure that it's exactly what you need. These are powerful switches and they can do a lot. They probably do more than most people might need so just make sure that it's the right switch for you.

To me, this is a product that meets all of the needs that anyone could possibly have for a networking device. I mentioned the issue with the licensing, although all of the manufacturers are now going with that licensing model. I think that I have that problem with anybody, at this point.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Our use case of the product is for our primary infrastructure on campus and supporting our wireless network culture. I'm the director of institutional technology and we are users of Meraki. 

The solution provides us with better statistics than we previously had. That's a great feature.

Having the Meraki GUI controlled elements meant that I could train my help desk guys without having to try and teach a command line.

I'm an old CLI guy from Cisco so I've had to give up some of the granularity that I'm used to having. With Cisco I could narrow things down but now I'm stuck to exactly what Meraki gives me. I don't have any options. Previously I used to be able to look at light levels on an object but I can't do that now. Those are a couple of little issues, but I do get it right out of the box whereas with Cisco it requires spending thousands of dollars and buying extra equipment to get the knowledge of what's going on in your network.

They've already released some new things on their flagship model. I'd like to see the price come down a little bit, but you've got to pay for what you get like the 38 series switch. With Cisco you can stack them for command and control whereas with Meraki, you can stack them with power, but each individual switch is still controlled as an individual switch. You don't see them as one switch. They're stacked with stacking cables, it's multiple switches. It's little stuff, nothing serious. 

I've been using this solution for three years. 

It's a stable solution and great for software updates. You just click on it and it does it automatically for you. The next morning it's ready to rock and roll. At my school, I have 170 faculty staff, and I've got 800 students.

I work in a school and we've had a huge disruption with coronavirus and having students studying remotely on campus and remotely off campus and needing more throughput than what the firewall can cope with. I'm right at the cusp of needing a bigger firewall. Meraki doesn't necessarily always have the exact feature that you'd like. 

I think the support is good. Sometimes they even tell you that you've got a problem before you get to it. They've been very forthcoming with their help.

As mentioned, I previously worked with Cisco. I was at a Cisco shop before I got here and we had one person to do networking, and two guys that worked in the help desk so I helped out on the networking side. The main difference is that with Cisco you can get exactly what you want but you can't do that with Meraki.

The initial setup was straightforward. 

It's well worth the time and effort to get the solution going and use it in the future.

I would rate this product a nine out of 10. 

The switches make up part of the network infrastructure in the company.

We primarily use VLANs and Wi-Fi.

The most valuable feature is the ability to segment my infrastructure between phones, security systems, and other tasks.

The dashboard is very easy to use.

Better alerting capabilities are needed because they do not provide enough notification or detail about events. For example, it doesn't tell me if I have lost an access point, or I'm getting packet drops, or somebody is using excessive bandwidth because of a download they are doing. It is very hard to drill down on these problems and sometimes, you might have to use a third-party solution to pull the reports out.

Technical support is in need of improvement.

I have been using Meraki MS Switches for about one year.

The stability is great.

Our company has not had to scale our network. However, some of our clients that use these same switches have scaled up, and it was an easy process for them. This is in part because it is easy to change configurations on the fly.

The technical support for this product is difficult to deal with. With multiple levels, it is very difficult to get through to the right person that can help with the problem. It is disappointing because when you pay a lot of money for the hardware, you expect to get the support that you need to get.

I handle the maintenance of these switches, including firmware updates.

We paid for our switches outright, at a cost of between $15,000 USD and $18,000 USD.

In summary, this is a good product except that the technical support and alerting need to be improved. As it is now with the alerting, I get messages from the firewall before I am alerted by the Meraki hardware. It makes it more difficult to troubleshoot.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The general use case is just as a unified platform for APs and switches. In our particular case, we brought on a client that had firewalls, access points, and had a need for switches to all run on one platform.

Where they are in the market and the market segment with their cloud management is an impressive aspect of the solution that originally lead ut to the solution. The maturity with their cloud management is really great.

The technical support is quite good.

The initial setup is straightforward.

In terms of the switches, generally, we have some stability problems. There are general stability issues with them. It's been inconsistent for a couple of years. It's not really based on any firmware. 

Switches that are in production and running will stop responding. And so we have to reboot the switches.

We've been using the solution for six years at this point.

The stability of the solution isn't ideal. We've had a lot of problems with the switches. They are unstable and unreliable. We need to reboot them often.

I haven't seen any issues with scalability. Our environment is relatively small, about 20-25 offices, and therefore we haven't tried to expand the solution.

The support of the solution has always been very good. They're very knowledgable and responsive. We're satisfied with their level of attention.

The initial setup is not complex. It's straightforward.

We are a Cisco partner. Our previous solutions were all Cisco-based, however, we were just using the traditional Cisco 2900 Series Switches. We still have a lot of those in production.

As far as switches go, it's a good product. As long as it makes a good fit for the customer, the only advice is to not let the maturity of the product dictate the need to implement.

There are a lot of solutions out there now that are a little bit cheaper, and that might meet a company's desired price point. Many other products also provide the same level of functionality. Don't just buy it because of the name.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten overall.