MikroTik Routers and Switches Reviews

We use this product to route traffic with dynamic routing protocols like BGP. We also use it for filtering traffic and making network translations to provide access to services that are behind it. In this regard, it acts as a firewall.

It hosts a lot of B2B sessions with our internal and external peers.

MikroTik provides us a quick way to give access to internal services from outside of our network, and a way to manage those services.

This solution offers features that make it convenient for debugging.

Traffic classification is a very convenient feature.

The flexible IP firewall and IP network address translation make it very easy to give access to internal services. 

I would like to see a cluster feature added, where multiple devices can be configured and managed as one. One is in a standby state while the other is active, and if one fails then the other takes over.

The stability can be improved.

We have been using a MikroTik router for seven or eight years.

This solution is not very stable. I would rate stability at seven out of ten.

The scalability is good and we have 50 or 60 users, in addition to perhaps five technical staff who can connect devices and configure them.

Technical support responds very quickly. However, we very often catch bugs that they are not aware of, which is bad. MikroTik should be finding these bugs itself.

We are happy with the communication from technical support, but they should improve with respect to testing and releasing updates.

The initial setup is very straightforward and easy. It will take several hours to set up and have it work properly.

The implementation was done by my team.

There is no licensing fee in addition to the hardware, but we do pay an annual fee for support.

I would recommend this solution for those who don't need a very stable solution. You will not have zero-downtime provided by MikroTik. Also, if you need clustered routers then this solution will not work. However, if you are willing to update several times a month with several minutes of downtime while upgrading and rebooting, then it will be fine.

The biggest lesson that I have learned from using this solution is to write the network plan out before implementing changes. Then, go only by the steps of the plan, and do not deviate.

Overall, it is a very good solution with a lot of features.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The radius and wireless features are the most valuable aspects of the solution.

The queuing functionality needs improvement. The initial setup could be simplified.

The stability of the solution is great.

The scalability of the solution is very good.

We've used technical support a few times and have always found them to be quite good.

We have previously used Cisco and HP solutions.

If you are not familiar with the solution, the initial setup can be a bit complex. It's quite different from other solutions. Deployment times vary, but it should only take a few hours.

I handled the implementation myself.

The cost of the solution is okay. It's not too expensive.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If they made it a bit easier for new users to implement, I would rate it higher.

We use MikroTik Routers and Switches for Wi-Fi distribution and connecting the network to all our IoT devices.

The product is very reliable.

The product's setup process could be easier. Additionally, its interface needs to be modern, similar to Grandstream.

We have been using MikroTik Routers and Switches for more than five years.

The product has good 100% stability.

We have 20 customers for MikroTik Routers and Switches. It has good scalability. It provides more than enough internet access.

Recently, we started using Grandstream.

The initial setup is complicated. It takes half an hour to complete.

I take help from an IT executive whenever I encounter any implementation issues.

MikroTik Routers and Switches is a very stable equipment. I rate it a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the product for load balancing and as a gateway.

The stability of the solution is excellent.

We've enjoyed the fact that it has very good performance.

The scalability potential is very good.

The solution is very easy to install and the implementation doesn't take too long.

The pricing is very competitive.

The solution needs to offer better documentation. That is what is lacking right now.

The user interface could be a bit better. It could be a bit more user-friendly with a bit of a re-design.

I've used this solution for a couple of years at this point.

The solution is very stable and we've found the performance to be excellent. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't seem to crash or freeze. The reliability is excellent overall.

The scalability capabilities have been very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so with relative ease.

We have about 1,300 users on the solution right now.

I've never been in touch with technical support just yet. I've never had a reason to reach out. Therefore, I cannot comment on how helpful or responsive they might be.

I've also used Cisco, Aruba, and HPE, for example. 

The initial setup is not difficult or complex. It's straightforward and very easy to implement. The deployment process is very fast as well. It only really takes a couple of minutes and you are ready to go. 

We are a team of four, and we can handle any deployment or maintenance tasks quite easily.

I handled the implementation myself, in-house. I did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant when I deployed it. 

The pricing is excellent. It's very reasonable and much less than, for example, Cisco.

Typically, on the initial package, you do need a license.

I'd rate the solution, on a scale from one to ten, at a seven. For the most part, we've been pleased with its capabilities.

I'd recommend the solution, especially from a pricing point of view. If Cisco is out of a company's budget, it's definitely an option.

We use this solution for normal routing, as well as load balancing for internet traffic. I have a dual internet load balancing setup.

This is an on-premises solution.

The improvement is that we can have two different internet service providers offering 2Mbps each, and you can combine the bandwidth to make it 4Mbps. You can also achieve multiple failovers.

The most valuable feature is controlling the bandwidth. This is helpful because the users' bandwidth requirements keep changing, and we have three connections to handle the data.

The wireless switches are good.

Configuring load balancing requires a very ground-level configuration that is not easy for normal users.

The user interface allows you to do a lot of things, but it is not user-friendly. 

This solution is quite stable.

Right now, I am not using it for VPN.

I have not contacted technical support for this solution. If there is a problem then I try to find solutions for the problem online.

We did not use another solution prior to this one.

When I first starting working with this solution I found the initial setup to be complex, but now I think that it's easy. It takes approximately ten minutes to deploy, although if you want to set up more advanced features like load balancing then it might take thirty minutes.

One person is suitable for both deployment and maintenance.

I performed the deployment myself.

This product is a one-time purchase.

This is a great product that gives you a lot of good features at that price.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case for this solution is to provide wireless internet service.

This solution provides our service at a low cost with excellent quality.

The most valuable feature is that you can do anything on all platforms.

The GUI is also good, and the CLI is excellent.

Wireless throughput has not kept up with the competition.

We use MikroTik Routers and Switches as a router and firewall. We also use it to manage our Hotspot users. 

The MikroTik Hotspot is great. My company uses the Captive Portal as a staff login to access the internet and the company portal. Via the Hotspot, my company connects to the API.  

The overall performance could be improved. The CPU load is too high. This causes the Internet to lag. 

MikroTik should be open source.

I have been using MikroTik Routers and Switches for roughly four to five years.

The MikroTik operating system is not open source. The API is limited. 

Sometimes we consult with the online community, but it's quite limited in Indonesia — there are not many MikroTik users here. 

The initial setup was complex, but not too difficult in the end.

Compared to Cisco, I don't think MikroTik is very good. MikroTik is good for start-ups and small businesses with small budgets. If you have a big budget, I would recommend using 
UniFi, or Cisco.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give MikroTic a rating of seven.

We primarily use the solution for the internet.

We are a mid-sized provider and we are acquiring smaller providers. MikroTik is a brand that is used across these ISPs and we have the experience with the product within our company. There's a familiarity with the solution we appreciate. The reason that we decided to keep this brand is that it's reliable. It offers good IT Station reports. 

The solution is stable. 

The product has proven to be scalable.

The pricing is good. There's a good ratio of pricing to performance, which is why we use that product.

Better security is always better. If they can continue to improve in this area, that would be ideal.

We've been using the solution for a couple of years at this point. 

The solution has proven to be very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is consistently very good.

The scalability has been excellent. If a company needs to expand it out, it's not a problem. They can do so. 

A lot of our work is B2B with mid-sized clients that might have dozens of users. 

I've never directly dealt with technical support. I cannot speak to how helpful or responsive they are. I don't have the direct experience to be able to comment. 

We also have experience using Cisco (for more demanding installations) and Huawei. Our company tends to use Huawei in B2C situations. 

It's my understanding that the installation process is quite straightforward. It's not too complex or difficult. 

We have administrators and technicians that can handle deployments. We are doing remote installations. We have one technician usually on-premise. They physically connect the device and another technician remotely configures the device. We have some configuration templates. It's quite easy and quick for our team to deploy everything.

We can handle the deployment for customers.

The pricing is very reasonable. It's not too expensive. 

I don't handle licensing costs. I'm not sure how payments are set up and whether a company would have to pay monthly or yearly.

I'm not an IT guy. I'm a business product manager. I'm more of a product or marketing guy. Therefore, I'm not overly technical. 

We're service providers for a variety of organizations. 

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We're pretty happy with the product.

I would recommend the solution to other organizations.