Meraki MX Reviews

We use MX to provide Wifi for all the clients, patients, doctors, nurses, etc. in our hospital, they are using the WiFi to use the internet. So, we are using it mainly for the internet. It is managed via a cloud-based Cisco dashboard.

MX is easy to manage, configure and install. 

MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients. 

They could also add improve the content filter by adding Arabic. It only filters English-language content. Meraki should work on that feature for other languages.

I've been using Meraki MX for two or three years. 

MX is stable. The updates go smoothly, and there are no issues.

MX is scalable. We sometimes have 300 to 400 users connected at the same time. It's a highly stable product. 

I used the ADSL Cisco router.  It was a catastrophe due to limitations on users. Once we exceeded around 200 simultaneous users, we started seeing a lot of problems.

Deploying MX is easy. It takes maybe half an hour. I didn't need any support. I could do it all myself.

I believe we need to review our contract and maybe get a lower price when we upgrade our renew our license. Hopefully, we can negotiate with Cisco for lower prices.

I studied other options, but I found Meraki was a complete product for allowing large amounts of users to connect to the internet.

I rate Meraki MX eight out of 10. It is a good product. 

Meraki MX is a firewall with wireless capabilities built in. We use the APs in approximately 10 different customer sites.

The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers.

I have been using Meraki MX for approximately six years.

Meraki MX is a dependable solution.

Meraki MX is scalable. I have the Meraki MX set up from Oklahoma all through several of the big cities in Tennessee and northern Alabama. We use it, and we run it for a particular company for voice-over IP phones. It works well. I don't have any issues with them. We can set up virtual networks, separating data and voice traffic.

Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies.

The support from Meraki MX is good. It is easy to get in touch with technical support 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are responsive and knowledgeable.

I have previously used Barracuda. For larger companies, such as banks and financial institutions, I use Barracuda firewalls. However, they are more complex. You have to have penetration testing. Every year we have penetration testing from external companies to make sure no one can get in because they have federal audits that come in and check banks. Barracuda is the better solution for this purpose, we've had great luck with them. We've always had perfect scores whenever we deploy them and we have external penetration tests. They have a 24-hour day, seven days week support similar to Meraki MX.

Meraki MX is simple to deploy and manage. You only need to plug it in and configure it.

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

The price of Meraki MX is between $8 and $1,200. Additionally, we typically purchase a three-year enterprise license, and we pay approximately $899 and mark it up a bit.

I would recommend others call us, we can implement the solution for them.

We have three technicians for maintenance, and we all can handle servers, firewalls, and routers. Once we put the Meraki MX in, it doesn't require much maintenance. It has automatic updates and we receive all the firmware updates. Once they're in place, we don't have any issues with them. However, if we do, it's easy to get in and make configuration changes.

I rate Meraki MX a nine out of ten.

We deploy for customers including automobile dealerships, medical locations, manufacturing, and cannabis. We implement the solution to allow easier management of the equipment involved in these industries. 

The solution makes firewall management simple and easy, so other people in my organization can manage the firewalls, not just me. 

I think cloud management is key. The cloud management and support are the two things that make the product great.

Meraki has some hidden features and information that is only privy to their engineers. If that information became available to us, then it would improve our ease of management, and we would be able to make certain adjustments instead of having to go to them.

I have been using this solution for about four years. 

I've been working with the solution for four years and have never had a stability issue. I did have one unit fail, but it got drenched with water. 

The solution is highly scalable, there are different models available depending on how many users will be behind the firewall. That can be a few users or thousands. 

We have deployed in locations that have one site with two or three users, and we have deployed in other places that have ten locations with ten firewalls and behind each firewall might be 50 people, so up to 500 people or more. Then we create site-to-site VPNs between each of the locations.

I put in Meraki for every customer in need of a firewall who does not have this product. I have some customers with Cisco ASA contracts lasting another one or two years, so when they expire, I will put in a Meraki.

They're quick, responsive, and easy to get ahold of. They're usually on the phone within minutes. 

Positive

We previously used Fortinet FortiGate and Cisco ASA Firewall, we switched because Meraki MX offers ease of management. The Cisco and Fortinet firewalls are more complicated, requiring more knowledge and involvement to manage. 

The initial deployment was very straightforward and simple. The solution doesn't require much knowledge and the customer support is readily available. We don't have to do any maintenance at all, the vendor notifies us of scheduled firmware updates and they handle everything. 

Setup requires deploying the firewall to the internet, setting up the inside addressing, and possibly a DHCP scope or VLANs.

We implemented in-house with just one person.

I have definitely seen an ROI with this solution, it makes changes much quicker. Creating a site-to-site VPN with a Cisco ASA Firewall would take me one to two hours, but it takes me about two minutes with a Meraki MX appliance. 

I think the price is comparable with other solutions of the same kind. Depending on the use case it could be cheaper or more expensive, I think it offers good value.

We tried SonicWall and Sophos firewalls and we had more challenges with them.  

I've been in this industry for 40 years and this is the simplest and easiest product that I've ever used. What's important to me is it makes my people more capable. Instead of having to rely on one or two people within the company that know the firewalls, this solution is so simple that anyone with a small amount of technical capability can manage it.

Most of our solutions are on-premises, but we do have one MX in the AWS cloud. 

I use the solution for some simple usage in our office for the people, so there is nothing too much. I am interested in the scalability of the tool.

The solution's most valuable features stem from the single pane of glass dashboard, along with other components of the tool like configuration, administration, monitoring part, integration capabilities with Cisco solutions, and ease of comparison with other Cisco equipment or Cisco Meraki hardware devices.

I don't think I can comment on what needs improvement in the solution because of the usage of Meraki MX in our company. The tool is not complex. For my type of usage, I am satisfied with the results of the product. I think that I may use the product on a larger scale.

The fact that the product is a little expensive and how it needs to be made cheaper from an improvement perspective is a debatable topic, in my opinion.

I have been using Meraki MX for a year and a half.

I use only Cisco hardware in my building, where I also have my network with Meraki MX. I don't have any problems, and I haven't tested the equipment in a multi-vendor environment.

I didn't reach the need to use a relevant scalability test in my company because I am using the tool for the first time for just two users and four guest users. Before I can talk about scalability, I should use the tool's scalability features.

I prefer Meraki MX for personal use. In professional terms, I am working with Cisco on a regional basis in Europe.

I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

For networking and my personal use, Meraki MX is the first infrastructure I have experience with, but on a professional side, I use Cisco.

The product's initial setup phase was simple, considering how Meraki's documentation is very intuitive, which explains how to use the platform, its configuration capabilities, and its administration.

The solution is deployed on the private cloud.

Depending on the purpose of the solution for the user, it might be worth the money. If a user wants to use extra hardware equipment at its full potential or full features on a long-term basis, Meraki MX is a good choice. If you don't want to have a complex tool with features, workload, and so on, Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution.

The product is a little expensive.

I did not choose any other solutions in the market since I got familiar with Meraki MX. I wanted to start with Meraki MX because I thought it was the most appropriate hardware that I could use, especially to add access points, some IoT devices, and switches. Meraki MX is a tool that I can build an infrastructure around.

Within Cisco, I checked for second-generation MV cameras.

For sure, I will recommend the tool's potential users to at least do a demo because one of the best parts of interacting with Meraki is that users can use a demo version for a certain period and do their own tests to see if it is okay or not. After I was okay with the functionalities, I went to use the product for myself.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The solution is mainly based on the cloud which is highly adaptable to the needs of its users due to its large user base. By employing over fifty VPS, we strategically position these units where clients require them the most. Remarkably, the cost of this setup is notably more affordable compared to competing alternatives. The management dashboard allows users to oversee each branch within their network. This comprehensive view is unified within the dashboard, offering insights into the entire branch network. The system works mostly for financial institutions, particularly banking clients.

The cloud management system is really valuable.           

Direct logging is something that can be introduced. In the absence of cloud management, the possibility of local configurations and on-premise logins becomes restricted. This limitation stands as a primary concern. When it comes to resolving issues, the inability to access login options hampers troubleshooting efforts.

The stability is noteworthy; but when compared to alternative products, its stability is comparatively lower. Additionally, certain limitations are observed in terms of remote control. Price-wise, the solution stands out for its competitive and cost-effective nature compared to other alternatives. Operationally, it is user-friendly and requires minimal effort from administrators, making configuration hassle-free.

I have been using Meraki MX for the last three years.

The solution is stable however there are issues and we need to reboot sometimes. I would rate it five out of ten. 

Considering the needs of medium-class clients, scalability proves to be highly advantageous. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The initial setup is easy via the cloud portal, primarily because managed support is needed for internet access. Without this, the direct configuration of the box becomes unattainable.The duration required is significantly shorter compared to alternatives. Occasionally, when dealing with a larger number of branches, like fifty or more, we managed to complete the implementation within 14 days. In cases involving complex processes and discussions, additional time might be necessary. However, once the system is set up and connected to the cloud, other configurations can be done within an eight-hour timeframe.

This solution is viable for medium-sized enterprises and even larger ones, presenting an affordable option. The scalability aspect should be factored in, considering the specific branch alterations. For branch placements, Meraki offers a suitable scalability model, adaptable based on the branch size and user count. We own a range of appropriately sized Meraki boxes to address varying branch needs. When attending to any issues, especially during branch implementations, on-site visits might be necessary. However, in the absence of cloud management, Meraki can be easily managed centrally and remotely. This approach facilitates efficient updates, configuration management, and comprehensive visibility, all streamlined within a single dashboard. 

I would rate overall solution a seven out of ten. 

We use Meraki MX for system networking.

Meraki MX’s most valuable feature is cloud and app management. Additionally has a helpful feature for database troubleshooting issues.

We can’t access GUI management and CLI opening features when the Internet is unavailable.

We have been using Meraki MX for two years.

I rate the platform’s stability a seven and a half.

We have two administrators and 600 end users for Meraki MX.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

The initial setup is complicated when the Internet is unavailable. However, it is easy to configure and takes two years to complete.

The product’s price is reasonable.

I rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

You can use your web browser to do the configuration which is easier than Cisco CLI transcripts. 

We do not have account managers in our region for the solution. Some governments don't use the product since it is attached to the internet. 

The solution is scalable and you can add as much as you want. 

The solution's setup is straightforward and easier than Cisco's. There is a subscription and you need to activate it. 

The solution is expensive compared to other vendors but you can get good discounts if you know the account manager. The product is less expensive than a normal Cisco subscription. The tool's hardware warranty is a lifetime but you need to purchase support which comes in three, five, and seven years subscriptions. 

I would rate the product a ten out of ten. 

We use Meraki MX for cloud-based networking, particularly as a firewalls and routers.

What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates.

I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done.

Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that.

An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way.

I've been dealing with Meraki MX for four years now.

Stability-wise, Meraki MX is okay. It performs as it's supposed to. There was one hardware failure, and the Meraki team replaced the unit practically overnight, no questions asked.

The technical support for Meraki MX is a ten out of ten for me.

Positive

Meraki MX has a straightforward setup.

The pricing for Meraki MX is all right, but as the hardware needs to be licensed, the cost depends on the complexity of the device and the term. Pricing could be $100 to $10,000 yearly or even more for a more complex device.

My company is a Cisco partner and a reseller of Meraki MX.

My rating for Meraki MX is ten out of ten.