We performed a comparison between Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) and macmon Network Access Control based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Access Control (NAC) solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The WiFi portal in Cisco ISE is very useful for WiFi customers."
"It does what it's supposed to. We use a certificate-based authentication method for corporate-managed devices. That means when a user walks in with their managed laptop and plugs it into the network, it chats with Cisco ISE in the background, allows it on the network, and away they go."
"We have seen ROI. It has done its job. It has protected us when we needed it to."
"It's flexible and stable. It's been good as a standard environment to run."
"The most important feature for us is visibility in terms of user connections. It's the ability to see what devices are online for a particular user that helps a lot with our troubleshooting."
"SGTs are valuable because they make it easy to enforce policies, instead of pushing them across all the other platforms."
"Cisco ISE now competes with any other product in the space because of its centralized and unified highly secure access control with ISE."
"It's scalable."
"The API is a great way to get information from other tools."
"We use it with our Cisco switches so we can see which switch it is actually connected to."
"The ease of connecting with the client is valuable for me."
"The solution lacks properly knowledgeable support, especially internationally, and this is why I am exploring other applications."
"I believe that Cisco can improve the way its policies are built because it's a little complex."
"I would like the product to include support for OSVS version three."
"The opinion of my coworkers, and it's mine as well, is that the user interface could use some tender loving care. It seems counterintuitive sometimes. If you go to the logs, it's hard to figure out which one you need to look at."
"I'm frustrated by the resource consumption and how many resources it needs to run. It takes a lot of RAM. It takes a lot of space and a lot of IO power. It's frustrating to do upgrades because it takes a long time."
"The interface could be more user-friendly and the ability to apply rules to MAC addresses, for example, if I wanted to allow a certain MAC address access at a particular time I cannot make this adjustment."
"Adding new devices was a little cumbersome. I haven't done it that many times, but I remember that adding new devices to the authentication piece of it was a little cumbersome. The way I was shown to do it, I thought it was odd because we had to go into the active device, copy the file down, export it, make some changes to it, and then reimport it as opposed to being able to click it and having a template to fill out."
"One of the issues that we used to have was with profiling because we're working with a service provider that uses a lot of bring your own devices."
"The solution must allow users to filter files based on dates."
"The service macmon offers is already great."
"The single sign-on process can be improved and the interface should be made more user-friendly."
More Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) Pricing and Cost Advice →
More macmon Network Access Control Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is ranked 1st in Network Access Control (NAC) with 138 reviews while macmon Network Access Control is ranked 9th in Network Access Control (NAC) with 3 reviews. Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is rated 8.2, while macmon Network Access Control is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) writes "Gives us that extra ability to assist the end user and make sure that we are making them happy". On the other hand, the top reviewer of macmon Network Access Control writes "A robust solution that provides protection to effectively control the access to your network". Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, Forescout Platform, CyberArk Privileged Access Manager and Fortinet FortiAuthenticator, whereas macmon Network Access Control is most compared with Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC and Forescout Platform. See our Cisco ISE (Identity Services Engine) vs. macmon Network Access Control report.
See our list of best Network Access Control (NAC) vendors.
We monitor all Network Access Control (NAC) 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.