1. Home
  2. Routers
  3. Cisco Routers Reviews
  4. User Review of Cisco Routers
Meraki is great if you like to pay monthly fees
December 14, 2020

Meraki is great if you like to pay monthly fees

Anonymous | TrustRadius Reviewer
Score 6 out of 10
Vetted Review
Verified User

Overall Satisfaction with Cisco Routers

  • Meraki MX
We have Meraki MX Cisco Routers at a couple different remote locations. They allow us to manage all devices from one web console without having to individually log in to multiple remote devices. It's nice not to have to worry about managing updates on each device, so I'm definitely happy about that.
  • Centralized management
  • Automatic updates
  • Simple site-to-site VPN configuration
  • The yearly license fee for Meraki products is way too costly
  • No ability to manage an individual device and no CLI interface
  • Some configuration changes are difficult or not well implemented
  • It has helped increase IT productivity by making network management easier
  • The yearly subscription fee is too expensive and isn't worth it
The Meraki series of Cisco Routers are best used as an all-in-one solution. Basically, if you decide to go with Meraki, go all in and replace all network devices with Meraki equipment. It doesn't work as well with other equipment because it won't have the full monitoring ability for the entire network, so finding a device or changing settings would be more difficult unless you're using all Meraki equipment. It's also not as easy to connect remote devices to Meraki devices, so having a homogeneous Meraki network definitely reduces labor cost and complexity.
The Meraki series provides really good threat protection and is a good option for overall network security. Having the constant updates and always-on link to the web console allows Cisco to include better security than on their standalone devices. I think the subscription fee helps force Cisco to support their Meraki products with updates longer than they would with a standalone product, so I don't have to worry about replacing equipment as often.
Cisco does a great job with providing access because the web console means all devices are visible at all times. This is much simpler than the standard device, which has minimal or no connectivity and on which you can only see one device at a time. The downside is that all Meraki devices need a constant Internet connection, which is not always feasible or secure depending on the environment.
The Meraki devices are much simpler to manage and configure than any of their other devices. Being able to manage all devices at once makes it easier to detect a problem. The monthly subscription fee is the hardest part to look past, as it's a lot more costly to use Meraki equipment compared to buying other Cisco products with cash and using them for many years.
The Meraki MX series of Cisco Routers are well suited for an organization that doesn't have enough time to manage firewalls, security, or updates--along with the cash flow to pay for the yearly subscription. They are also good for organizations with multiple levels of IT experience because the web interface makes it easy to change network settings, track where network devices are, and deploy updates. They are not good for networks that are highly static because you would already know where things are on the network and wouldn't need the web interface for finding devices or changing settings. They are also not good for companies that don't want to pay an ongoing subscription fee, as the cost is quite high compared to what is provided, and if you stop paying for the yearly subscription, the hardware is useless.