Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

We use this solution for a full range of layer two and only limited set of layer three services.

We are a backbone company and we provide a public service. The traffic of millions of users traverse Cisco switches, but they are not within our company. It's a public service.

We plan to increase our usage of this solution.

The operating system is great.

They need to implement sFlow, other than that, I can't think of anything else that needs to be improved — I am happy.

We have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for roughly 10 years. 

Cisco Catalyst Switches are very stable. We've been using them for 10 years without any issues. 

We use an old model, they're not designed to be scalable. But in general, the Catalyst networking suite is scalable.

For our application which is rather simple, we are using only 5% of the features that Cisco Catalyst switches offer. We haven't encountered any problems and therefore, we have not had to call technical support.

We used to use other products, but our CTO loves Cisco. 

The initial setup is straightforward and very fast. In total, the whole installation process took two days.

We deployed this solution by ourselves. 

3-years

The price could always be lower.

Arista, Fiber Store, Dell, Extreme Networks

I would absolutely recommend this solution to others. Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Catalyst Switches a rating of ten.

We use it to connect our end users. It is used for DMZ connections behind the firewalls and campus network.

All features are very strong. It is very easy to manage. It is also certified and popular.

Cisco has come up with a new management console to manage the switches. I still haven't tried it, but in my opinion, this is the best way forward. You can use software to manage the switches instead of the common line configuration. You can manage it through software, which is very easy.

It can have more security features to secure the access layer.

I have been using Catalyst 9300 Series for the last two years. It is a new model. I have been using previous models, such as Catalyst 3750, 3560, and 2960, for maybe more than 15 years.

It is very stable. You just install it and forget about it for years. I had a switch that was running for more than 11 years without a singular restart. That switch had a running time of more than 11 years.

It is scalable. We have 400 users.

Technical support is great. I was talking to one of my colleagues just two hours back about Cisco technical support. They are brilliant and excellent. If we have any hardware failure, we get it fixed the second day. We get multiple engineers working on the case if it is a critical issue. They are really supportive.

I have been using only Cisco solutions from the beginning. It has been more than 20 years now.

We plan to keep using this solution. We are going to refresh it with the latest model. We are in the process of acquiring the new model and replacing all obsolete switches with the new Catalyst 9K series. The order will be placed maybe next week.

Its setup was easy. It took an hour to configure each switch.

I deployed it myself. We have three network engineers to manage the entire network. 

I would definitely recommend this product to other users. I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a ten out of ten.

We don't personally use the switches; we provide services to our clients, including implementing the switches for them.

Catalyst switches solutions are great. For various customers we have deployed for, business operations run smoothly and without any complain. Troubleshooting and insights are clearer. 

Our customers love working with us. 

Catalyst switches support a variety of features from both layer 2 and layer 3. The fetaures supported depend on the model your dealing with. Though there are various common features such VLAN, MLAG, SDM, STP, Resiliency, PoE, Wireless settings, etc....which Stacking feature happens to be the most common deployment. 

Recently I laid hands on Meraki Switches and what I can say to love is its seamless network services to build high-performance networks. 

The user interface needs improvement. It might make them a bit more user friendly.

The one thing that I came across with the Catalyst 2950-X switch was that I wanted to alter the dashboard, so I connected it to the management interface. I gave it an IP address and I used the browser. However, as soon as I accessed it, I realized that the system of the computer from which I was accessing it didn't support that version. I was using Linux and the OS didn't support the switch. I had to get a Windows computer to access the switch. The dashboard was difficult to manage. It would have been nice if they made it obvious that it didn't work on Linux.

I've been dealing with the solution for more than two years now. 

I wouldn't say that the switches are stable. It depends on the situation more than any fault in the technology, however.

If a customer approaches my company, we provide the best option for the client. Sometimes that's Catalyst. We do work to evaluate the client and their needs quite extensively before making recommendations. Most of the time, clients look only at the cost and not at the bigger picture. Many don't want to spend too much money. Sometimes, however, a better solution may cost more.

While a well-implemented product is typically stable, if a client says that they don't want to spend anything higher than X, you have to work within those parameters and explain what X will get them, which may ultimately be instability.

Very scalable. 

We have dealt with Cisco's technical support in the past. They were especially helpful and very polite. They are always there if we need them and their insights are always excellent. I would say that we have been satisfied with the level of support we've gotten so far.

Of course, we use and still use Meraki solutions. We didn't switch. Like I said, it is based on what customers need. 

The Catalyst switches take more time to implement than Meraki. How long it takes varies for each organization. It depends on the size and requirements. We have spent up to a few weeks on previous contracts setting up switches for companies.

Catalyst licensing varies from a thousand of dollars to 20+ thousands dollars , however, that might depend on the model or version you choose. There are some switches where the licenses are features-based and you need to get a specific license for specific items if you want to use them.

We've looked at Meraki, among other solutions.

While we have used Meraki, it's hard to compare them to Catalyst switches. Meraki is quite good and agile. They've simplified a lot of their processes and have some features that make actions easy to do on Meraki. However, Catalyst offers much of the same features, and are possibly more feature-rich.

Meraki is very much more focused on business needs. While it may be good for their own business model, it doesn't encapsulate everything. Catalyst does a better job in that regard. It has many more features on offer. You aren't limited, although you will want to focus on a particular kind of feature list for your deployment or your integration into your environment.

Cisco happened to own Meraki solutions now. 

Last year, we were Cisco partners, but something happened and Cisco made some changes to its partnership requirements. Right now, we are working on re-establishing the partnership with Cisco. We'd like to be partners again.

We are planning to be a distributor. For the moment, however, now that we are waiting on the partnership, we're more of an integrator. 

We have deployed on-premises mostly and also a hybrid version sometimes. It depends on what the customer wants and what fits best for their needs. It also depends on the model that you are talking about. On the Catalyst switches, as far as I know, the models vary from types of deployments and features. Some features are only available on applicable switches.

In terms of advice I would give to other companies, I'd say that I like both Meraki and Cisco. I don't really prefer one over the other. It depends on the situation which one makes the most sense. Both are very large solutions but I could recommend either.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. I really do love Catalyst switches. 

Our primary use case of this solution is for routing, switching, and for interconnecting sites.

It has become easier for us to troubleshoot and find issues faster in the management software for the switches. It saves us troubleshooting time because if the network is down it has a big impact on production.

The stability is the most valuable feature. We have some outages but it's 95% stable. 

The newer models are not so stable. Other products like 6800, 3750, were stable but starting from 3850 it got worse. We have a lot of issues and a lot of bugs. It's a new product so it's understandable but it should be improved. 

Scalability is easy. It's easy to increase the size of our network, we use templates. 

We haven't had to use their technical support. 

We wanted a reliable solution so we chose Cisco. We began working with them ten years ago. We have everything on Cisco and it's not worth it to switch everything to another brand. 

The initial setup is a bit complex but we have templates so we just have to deploy our template configuration. The VLAN configuration was complex. We have STP and different protocols which are not on the V-port so we had to enable it.

We implemented it ourselves. 

Ten years ago we used Avaya and HPE. 

I would rate it a seven out of ten. Not a ten because we are highly satisfied with all of their products but with the newer products, some parts have problems that take a while to fix.

I would say to go for Cisco. It is a stable and quality solution. 

We use it mainly for access, as an access switch to other PCs.

The greatest benefit for our organization is that our Cisco Catalysts are quite reliable. We can depend on them.

The most valuable features of this solution are that they are quite robust, they hardly ever fail.

In terms of additional features or improvements, I would like to see more fiber ports, more security features, and perhaps the integration of wireless features into the switch.

It is very scalable, because of the stacking features.

Cisco supports this solution quite well. I like the support from Cisco.

I have always used Cisco. I think it is the most reliable solution on the market.

When selecting a vendor, for me the most important criteria are 

• the competency of their engineering staff
• their product knowledge.

As I said, I mostly deployed it as an access switch, and at that level, it is not complex. If you are talking about using it as a core switch, that would be much more complex. But we are only using it as an access switch.

Do a comparison with other brands and look at their features. The main Cisco Catalyst features are that it is scalable and reliable. These are two things you should look into when doing your comparison.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst at eight out of 10. It's reliable, the features are quite full-fledged, and it's scalable.

We primarily use the solution for ethernet WAN connectivity, LAN connectivity, wireless, then integration with other third-party solutions. That's all we use it for, for the most part.

The solution is easy to use.

It is very stable and the performance has been very reliable. 

The installation process is fairly straightforward. 

Technical support has been helpful.

The solution should work to become more scalable. 

The price of the product is very expensive.

I've used the solution for a long time. It's likely been 15 years or more. It's well over a decade at this point. 

The stability is very good. The performance is great. It doesn't crash or freeze and there are no bugs or glitches. 

The solution is scalable enough. It could be better.

We have around 2,000 users on the switches currently.

Technical support has been good overall. We've been in touch in the past. They were helpful and responsive and we've been satisfied with them in general. 

We did not previously use a different solution. We've been using Cisco switches for a very long time. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. If I need to do a new deployment, for example, we just go to the store, get a new one, and install it. We have 40 right now. The installation is very easy.

Due to the fact that we have another of the Cisco products in our environment, Cisco Prime, it helps to deploy switches faster. It's very easy. It doesn't take much time to deploy.

We have five engineers that are able to handle any deployment or maintenance.

I was able to handle the implementation process myself. I did not need the assistance of an integrator or consultant. 

We do find the cost to be quite high. They should work to lower it if possible. 

I would rate the product itself at a nine out of ten. It's been very good so far and we are satisfied with its capabilities. The cost is quite high, however. 

I would recommend the solution to other users and organizations. 

Access layer Switches. VLAN Segmentation, Inter-VLAN and LAN Routing. 802.1X network access device.

This platform has enabled reliable connectivity across the entire campus network. Great performance and stability ensure that the network is available where you need it. The 802.1X port security and other security features work well and help keep the network secure. PoE helped us deploy WLAN APs, security cameras, and IP phones with minimal cabling.

• Very stable and dependable switches.
• The wide range of features will be enough for almost any LAN environment.
• The CLI is pretty much the same across all switching and routing platforms from Cisco, making deployment of new switches, replacement of damaged equipment, or upgrades to newer platforms very easy.

I have found no major drawbacks in the Catalyst platforms. The price is high, but for seemingly the best LAN switching platform available, coupled with Cisco's excellent support, the price doesn't seem to be too much.

No issues with stability.

No issues with scalability.

Technical support is the best I have worked with.

Basic switching functionality works out-of-the-box, as with any other switch. Complexity will depend on the task at hand, but if you're familiar with the Cisco CLI you should have no problem finding your way.

Pricing of Cisco equipment is high, but I think these switches are worth the price.

I have been working with Catalyst switches for 10 years. Cisco support is among the best there is. Use it.

We use it for connecting the users on the network. The performance has been good.

I've used other switches as well but, when configuring Catalyst, we are able to bring the network up in a very short time. If the company wants to extend the network or wants to get some new users on board, the usage is pretty fast and, in no time, it gets moving. For other switches, it might take some time for us to do research and get the system online. So it provides business benefits. The users don't have to wait to get on the network.

Cisco is one of the most robust switches, it is easy to configure, and the documentation is pretty good. Once you install it, you never face an issue with that switch.

One feature that I would like to add is for the following: At times, when I add an access list for a hostname, it doesn't actually add the hostname, it adds the IP address. So in the back-end, if my server changes the IP address, I have to go in manually and change the IP address. If the capability was there in Cisco to add a hostname instead of the IP address that would be really good.

It's a pretty stable product. Once you install it in the network, it keeps running without any issues. You just install it and forget it.

It's scalable. If you want to install more switches it's pretty easy to pull up a wire, configure the new switch, and connect it to the network. It starts and you won't have to worry if the other switches will be compatible with it or not. In a multi-vendor environment as well, if you want to more switches, it works pretty well.

Tech support is good. The response has been good.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. There is a guide, as well as support, on the internet. We just follow it. A person who is doing it for the first time can just follow it and get it installed.

I would definitely have colleagues go for Cisco Catalyst. It's a pretty good product, stable, and reliable.

Most important when selecting a vendor are that the connection should be stable, it should have good support, and it should not be really complex to configure.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst at nine out of 10. The one point I'm leaving is for the improvement I spoke about. There is always room for improvement. Cisco Catalyst is pretty good. I have never faced any issues or challenges with it.