We performed a comparison between Arista Networks Platform and Meraki MS Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Ethernet Switches solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It's an extremely reliable platform for the network switches we use."
"The product's initial setup phase was straightforward."
"The best part is the single operating system that they have. Regardless of your model, it's the same operating system functioning across the board, which means you don't have to worry about backward compatibilities between your older switches and the new ones that you deploy."
"The solution is scalable."
"What we like most is its performance to price ratio."
"Arista Networks Platform has a feature that helps with monitoring and management."
"We find the CloudVision switching feature of this solution really useful."
"Meraki MS Switches are amazing. Whoever built it is a genius. I like that it's a plug-and-play solution."
"I like the portal, it's really interesting."
"It is easy to configure and claim the switches by their serial number directly from the portal."
"It is easy to configure and provides complete visibility of the graphic end point."
"It makes the management of SSIDs fairly easy."
"I like the support, and basically, that's why I'm using Meraki by Cisco."
"The product offered a lower CapEx cost for the appliance."
"The solution is stable."
"The product fails to offer functions related to cloud orchestration, making it in areas where improvements are required."
"The solution is quite expensive. One of the negative aspects of it is the pricing."
"A smoother transition between ISPs during failover would improve the user experience by reducing unnecessary notifications and interruptions."
"The solution needs to improve their product range."
"Arista Networks Platform should focus on improving the compatibility or integration with Cisco solutions."
"The solution’s pricing could be better."
"The solution is a bit pricey."
"Its price can be better."
"I would like to add a voice capability to Meraki, to make a call or receive a call."
"I would like to see improvements to the dark mode in the next release, as I prefer the dark mode."
"It is not compliant with the requirements of specific industries that want to set it up within a particular region or country."
"The quote-building process is challenging and it needs to be simplified."
"Its troubleshooting features need work."
"The traffic reporting should be better in Meraki MS Switches. We want to be able to see all the traffic and where it is going. Additionally, detailed device utilization information would be very helpful for the security personnel."
"The scalability and integrative abilities with on-premises systems could stand improvement."
"This is quite an expensive solution."
Arista Networks Platform is ranked 13th in Ethernet Switches with 21 reviews while Meraki MS Switches is ranked 5th in Ethernet Switches with 87 reviews. Arista Networks Platform is rated 8.6, while Meraki MS Switches is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Arista Networks Platform writes "Affordable for enterprise-sized companies". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Meraki MS Switches writes "They're not expensive and configuration is very easy". Arista Networks Platform is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches, Cisco Nexus, Juniper EX Series Ethernet Switches, Aruba Switches and Cisco Ethernet Switches, whereas Meraki MS Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Cisco Ethernet Switches, Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, Fortinet FortiSwitch - Secure Access and HPE Ethernet Switches. See our Arista Networks Platform vs. Meraki MS Switches report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.