Cisco's Catalyst is one of that company's brand of network switches.
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX
Score 9.1 out of 10
N/A
Cisco Meraki MX Firewalls is a combined UTM and Software-Defined WAN solution. Meraki is managed via the cloud, and provides core firewall services, including site-to-site VPN, plus network monitoring.
Cisco tends to be solid and reliable and great for longer term projects where ROI can spread over longer periods. They tend to be less competitive when extended featuresets are needed, much more difficult and painful to manage service and feature licensing (especially in …
The equipments that we use to compare are very similar in a question of compatibility and speed. The Cisco Catalyst Switches was the standard for the years in the company and the robusts of the equipment brings the advantage to this family of products that we decided to use to …
* Arista Switches ** Arista switches are great, don't get me wrong, but the lack of PoE support, the lack of stacking, has really hindered their entry way into the campus market, 99% of my use cases are campus switching for end users, not data center, in this market, cisco wins …
The enormous difference between Catalyst and Meraki products is the granular and simple deployment. The Cisco security appliance firewall gives one and you more granular activity whereas the Cisco Meraki MX is focused on plug and play and it gets one and you going. I like …
For a small remote office, Cisco Meraki MX was compared to the PaloAlto next gen firewall.
Whilst the company prefers the use of PaloAlto for internet destined traffic, the office features and simplicity of management meant the Cisco Meraki MX was an easy choice for a small …
The main difference is the administration through the Meraki cloud, the ease of access to review the configuration at any time, and the scalability that Meraki provides in terms of the ease of adding new devices, today in addition to how well the devices work is It is important …
So, other products that I've used in the firewall world that are kind of equal to this is traditional Cisco ASA, I've used SonicWall firewalls and Sophos firewalls as well. As far as how they stack up each really has its place a lot of the time when it comes to customer …
I've used the entire Cisco Meraki stack extensively and really enjoy all their products. I really like the MX because Cisco Meraki goes above and beyond making it really simple to deploy a very sophisticated, strong firewall solution.
Our access infrastructure. If you want to bring many devices into your infrastructure and you don't want to bring the devices direct on the core routers, something like that. Or to the routers, the catalyst switches are perfectly suited for that or for top of direct switches.
the Cisco Meraki MX 's work great for us we have over 40 locations and each has it's own Cisco Meraki MX that connects to our main Cisco Meraki MX in our datacenter. Each site then connects to Meraki switches and access points. Very easy to setup and keep running smoothly. Secure and easy for users to get connected to VPN.
I think particularly for the 2960-Xs, these are quite sturdy. I believe they don't get, even if there's a power outage out at Cole's, we usually do some electricity work just to do the electricity redundancy. We just power off the, let's say, the transformers and then see if the mains can handle the power supply. So these 2960, these switches are quite sturdy, I believe, and they don't die on us, but I've seen with the 9200s and the other switches, they don't come back usually when there's a power outage or something like that. So we have to replace the power supply units and all those things to get them working again.
It's very easy to deploy these devices because it's a cloud-based controlling controller that controls it. So able to, once the device has internet access, all you need to do basically is to look up the controller serial number and it'll basically find it. And once you add it to your network to automatically incorporate that device into your network and basically build the panels for the SD-WAN service.
I wouldn't fault the product per se. I think it's just more its integration with the SSD access network that there could be room for improvement. I think the 9300 has been a solid device by itself, and I can't think of anything that I could fault on the device itself. It's probably been doing a very good job and we are happy with it.
They are consistently reliable and this switch in particular is a very affordable solution. We can place the Cisco Catalyst 1000 Series Switches gear in areas that we normally would not place a switch because it is affordable enough to make it justifiable. And because it is a reliable solution, we are confident it will continue to provide service over the long haul.
The simplicity and ease of use for the Meraki Dashboard make it an easy choice for our organization to renew our Meraki Enterprise Agreement. We will likely continue using the Meraki MC67-C, MX450, and other MX models in their catalog until we shift away from Meraki completely
Cisco by and far does a great job with the Catalyst line. From a layer 2 dumb switch all the way up to ISP carrier grade switching within the Catalyst portfolio. The best part about it is command parity among the various tiers of product. The only differences are going to lie in what features are available per switch.
Some features simply aren't there, but the ones that are there are pretty easy to use. Sometimes it is easy to get lost when trying to find the specific device you want to work on, but that's mostly due to how rarely we have to go into the interface.
Meraki MX devices support high availability (HA) configurations, which ensures minimal downtime if one device goes offline. This feature has helped us maintain a stable and reliable network, even in cases of hardware failures. ince Meraki is cloud-managed, we've noticed that the cloud infrastructure is generally highly reliable, with minimal service interruptions or downtime. This makes it easier to manage the network remotely without significant availability concerns. Meraki automatically pushes firmware updates and patches, which helps maintain system stability without requiring manual intervention. These updates are rolled out in a manner that ensures minimal disruption to service.
No, the packets flow. Sometimes you will see collisions and broadcast storms can happen which will slow performance but that can be fixed and the packets will flow.
The interface is pretty responsive. The lower end devices are easy to overwhelm if you have a lot of throughput. Be sure the model you get is rated for the amount of traffic you will have. Overbuild if possible, otherwise you won't be fully leveraging the connection from your ISP.
We rarely have issues with the product. I have only had to contact support one time since we put it in and that was to see if another vendor was giving me accurate information on an issue I was having.
I haven't ever had a bad experience with Meraki support. On the few occasions where I wasn't understanding the UI or needed some clarification about what a setting actually would do, I contacted them and they were very quickly able to provide help. Returns are simple and fast, too. We had to return a defective device one time and they shipped the replacement before we had even un-racked the one that was faulty. Unlike many other vendors, they didn't ask use to a do long list of scripted diagnostics, they just took my word for it that the device was broken and sent out a replacement immediately
Cisco Networking Academy partners with many local Colleges and High Schools to provide great hands-on training. You do need to drive to learn the topic. The in-class session only go so far. You really need to apply this to the real world. Cisco makes it easy for business to connect via CLC or Cisco Learning Credits.
great when they offered it, really tested your knowledge with hands on and see what your peers from other orgs know. glad to see that we were ahead of the curve of what our peers knew
The implementation of the Cisco Catalyst 1000 Series Switches is fairly seamless, especially if you are familiar with Cisco products. We have had Brocade switch gear in place too, and the differences between the manufacturers [are] not a major issue.
Implementing Meraki MX devices in phases—starting with a pilot group or select branch offices—was invaluable. This allowed us to identify potential configuration issues, troubleshoot problems, and refine our setup before rolling it out company-wide. It also helped to get feedback from early users and adjust the deployment strategy accordingly. The SD-WAN capabilities in Meraki MX were essential for optimizing our WAN traffic and ensuring better application performance across various locations.
I use some Aruba switches as well and some Huawei products as well. That's the reference, honestly, that's really all the products that are quite good are mostly copying what Cisco does. And when it does not copy, it's not as good. The only other competitor that does the same kind of project, but differently in a good way is Juniper. For me it works quite as well, but that's the only vendor that I would say is really different from Cisco and in a good way. I mean both are good but not the same way.
The Meraki Dashboard has been a lot more intuitive than CradlePoint NetCloud. We switched from CradlePoint to Cisco Meraki MX because we were already familiar with the interface which allowed us to be familiar with a single dashboard.
We are exclusive Cisco at our organization. In truth part of the reason is, with one type of switch and one manufacturer, it is easier to support. It is also easier to give consistent training to our staff in our tech department
I think at an organization level it's definitely a 10. You can automate when you're going to upgrade. You can do it on a peer network basis. There might be issues around scalability if things get a bit too complicated, but if you keep it simple and stupid is my examples of a retail store with an fpos machine, you're going to be fine.
I'm going to say positive impact. The biggest thing is especially coming from having a third party taking care of our network to us doing it ourselves. The ease of this with the overall high level visual that we can get as to how our day is starting and running reports to see how many outages have we had, what areas have they actually been in running these reports and being able to gather if it's a certain service provider that's causing an issue in a general area, maybe we need to switch service providers for ISP. So it's been great in that mannerism for us. Ease of manage, I mean, we have a limited number of staff, we have a lot of different offices across the country. And then this is relatively new for us because we did have a previous provider doing all of this for us.
