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.
$595
per appliance
UniFi WiFi Access Points
Score 9.0 out of 10
N/A
Ubiquiti Networks in San Jose provides the UniFi wi-fi access points. The enterprise products support 1,000+ client capacity, long-range 6 GHz performance, and 10 GbE PoE connectivity with native high availability architecture for critical enterprise environments.
Meraki is more entailed towards larger businesses and allow much quicker support remediation. Meraki does have a yearly license, whereas UniFi does not. UniFi is really nice and I would use it in smaller single SOHO applications, but wouldn't use it for larger organizations …
CEO/President - 360° IT Consulting, Server Management, IT Security
Chose Cisco Meraki MX
While Ubiquiti is cheaper and has products that will work at faster speeds, the fact that devices can fall off a network with no questions is an issue. I've never had this issue with [Cisco] Meraki [MX].
We felt the Cisco Meraki MX was superior to Ubiquiti when we were doing our initial evaluations. We felt that Meraki was far beyond enterprise-grade than UniFi and we felt that we were getting a lot more features and scalability opportunities for the value. We also noticed that …
Cisco Meraki does everything the competitors do but in a simpler method allowing more time to focus on the requirements of the company. FortiGate is more granular and offers more choice but for our needs, we decided to move forward with Meraki which can encompass Meraki Wifi …
I have deployed the Ubiquiti Networks Dream Machine Pro, and I have to say that the only reason I would ever choose that platform over Meraki is the price of the Meraki licensing. Ubiquiti does not have ongoing license fees, and their devices are seriously less expensive than …
We have deployed several firewalls over the years and found Cisco Meraki MX to be a great contender. Datto has high recurring monthly fees for devices with limited configuration options. Ubiquiti works great for our entry-level clients that need a starting point but have a …
I would prefer both Untangle and Fortinet over Meraki. The only downside of those two products is you need more technical network knowledge to manage the product. Untangle and Fortinet both offer more features and cost less than Meraki MX devices. Untangle has better …
I have evaluated and supported firewalls from MicroTik, Ubiquiti Networks, and SonicWall. The Cisco Meraki MX Security Appliance is a more well rounded and complete product compared to firewalls from these other vendors. The easy of configuration and the feature set of the …
I prefer Cisco ASA for large enterprise deployments. Fortigate works well but I'm not a huge fan of their GUI interface (maybe personal preference). Sonicwall and Watchguard are avoided and only used when we inherit the …
We have tried several network solutions. However, we have kept coming back to Cisco Meraki because it's simple and easy to use and bulletproof. It makes network management a joy and not a chore.
I prefer Cisco Meraki MX when compared to the similar solution from Unify. Cisco Meraki is much more stable and the cloud interface is quite better. Cisco Meraki belongs to a more expensive price range, though. I believe that Ubiquiti Networks UniFi is a good solution for the …
Cisco Meraki; Aruba; Juniper: I've looked at all of these. I have a ton of experience deploying and using Cisco Meraki. I love their solution. You get such a high level of technology with all the protections afforded by Cisco on the backend. However, the primary reason I choose …
Ubiquiti is the worst of all network products I've ever used - with the worst support. Even Netgear - as much of a joke as they are - have better products and support.
One way of looking at network equipment is by grouping all into two categories: Standalone, and Centrally Managed. Most home or SOHO network equipment is standalone, meaning each device is configured individually. If you need to adjust settings off-site, you need to allow it …
Unifi trails the competitors in the switch/gateway category but exceeds all competitors in WiFi and IP cameras. Cisco Meraki equipment is too expensive along with monthly costs. Netgear equipment is fine for simple networks but a small increase in upfront spend will get you …
The Meraki MX lineup is well suited for organizations that need centralized management of multiple locations, as it allows for both quick deployment and simple/easy remote administration all from a single pane of glass. It also works very well for providing VPN access for remote workers and helps monitor end-device uptime. It does, however, fall a bit short in its firewall's customization, compared to traditional appliances (like our WatchGuard Firebox), so perhaps less suited for organizations that need more customization, as the Meraki MX lineup is primarily designed for simplicity and straightforward cloud-based management.
I love the equipment for small-scale commercial solutions and quality without the price tag. I might not recommend their products for a large organization with multiple locations and servers. However, the GUI interface will allow remote access and setup across the network. I think this is a great solution for small businesses and families or home office solutions, provided there is some IT knowledge for setup and maintenance.
The Cisco Meraki MX series is phenomenal at allowing us to remotely manage networks. So the devices usually act as the brain behind our client's networks, which makes it really, really easy for our team to take a look at what's going on in those client network environments, resolve any issues, and make sure that our client's networks are staying secure.
Layer seven firewall rules. Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
Just making them more granular. We've been in meetings with Cisco SES where I've said feature requests many times and that's one of the big ones where it's just a little cumbersome to implement layer seven rules right now.
Initial configuration of access points can be rather tricky. Each one I have installed was a complete pain to get setup and connected with the UniFi Controller software. I never worked out what causes me problems, but thankfully once I've stumbled through the correct procedure, it does work completely reliably after that, for years on end.
The UniFi Controller software will nag you to share usage data. When offered to opt-in, I choose not to do so, but you'll eventually be nagged again on a future login.
Some of the 'tooltips' within the Controller software could be more informative.
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
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.
Ubiquiti makes great Access points at various tiers provided far better coverage and throughput than consumer-grade wireless repeaters and routers. We have not had any performance complaints from guests or from the administration who use the wifi on a daily basis.
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.
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.
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
Ubiquiti support is minimal, which is said to help decrease the cost of the equipment. However, with many reports of emails going directly to the Ubiquiti support line taking days to hear a response, you're better off either engaging with the community forums for help from fellow UniFi users or reaching out to a reseller that has training on the equipment that can assist.
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
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.
Cisco Meraki MX provides simplicity and scalability while cutting costs. With Meraki MX, you get a Security appliance, router, and Firewall in one appliance and managed with one GUI. These features enable the network engineers to maintain large-scale enterprises with a single dashboard from a remote site or anywhere with internet, all thanks to the Meraki cloud dashboard
Ubiquiti is overall easier to work with. There is no special training needed to accomplish many of the things required with a Cisco product. Since my time is stretched thin, I need something that I can manage without being weighed down by command-line communications. Also, I am able to use my wireless devices to maintain every Ubiquiti device on my network.
When I first started with my company we had various infrastructure and a mix of tech. Since going to Cisco Meraki MX we have noticed better network performance and our new sites are much easier to bring online. Users have noticed an improvement in VPN connection and getting into all our systems.
From a positive impact? Basically it allows us to set up shop very quickly. It allowed us to add sites to our network very quickly. From a negative perspective, I think the only thing is that I can see from a negative perspective is I have a preference to working with ACLI in terms of how I engage with the youth tool At the moment, the only way to actually engage with a tool is on a gui and sometimes what I'd actually like is more detailed information in terms of actual configuration that you'll actually get out of ACLI.