Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

We primarily use the solution for the virtualization infrastructure and for bare metal platforms.

We are satisfied with the solution's performance so far.

The stability has been perfect.

The solution can scale.

It is a very easy solution to use.

We have found the installation process to be very simple. 

The pricing is quite good.

The delivery dates need to be more expedient. This could be improved. Right now, when we need to buy a new Cisco Switch, we may have to wait a few months. It could be as much as six months sometimes. It's far too long of a wait.

I've been using the solution for a few years at this point. 

So far, the solution has been very stable. The performance is excellent. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The scalability of the solution is quite good. If a company needs to expand, it can do so.

We have hundreds of users that are leveraging this product.

At the moment, we do not have plans to increase usage.

We've never contacted technical support in the past. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

A very, very long time ago we used HP Brocade Switches. W removed over to Cisco mostly due to the fact that there is a very rich knowledge base over the internet. Also, the implementation is pretty straightforward and the commands are pretty easy to follow. 

When it comes to the initial setup, the solution is very simple and straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult.

How much time it takes depends on the configuration, specifically the complexity of the configuration for the Cisco Switch. Most of the time, a few days are enough for any configuration.

Two engineers are enough in terms of handling the initial setup.

We were able to set up the solution ourselves, in-house. It's not a complex process, and therefore, we did not need outside help from integrators or consultants.

There is a license that is paid with the Switch when you are buying the Switch.

It's reasonably priced.

I'm not sure if we are using the latest version of the solution, although we are often handling product updates.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

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. 

We have an Academy, we know how to manage it. We have the knowledge to manage it and it gives us security. We can configure the switch to resolve our internal problems. We can use one switch for five to six years.

It's used for our processor, a small data center, and we have our network with at least 500 users.

The most valuable feature is the interface, it's easy to configure. The command line uses a switch that gives us security.

In the next release, they should lower the price. It's too expensive. 

They should also have a graphic interface for the switches too without the command line. 

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for ten years. 

The stability is good. 

We have 500 users. 

It requires us to have at least 10 technicians. Five technicians and other administrative staff.

In the future, we need to do disaster recovery in the cloud. We are working on-premise and our future is to use it on the cloud for our disaster recovery.

We have a contract with a company that gives us support.

The initial setup was not very complex. 

We used a consultant for the implementation. 

Licensing is on a yearly basis. We usually spend up to $20,000.

I would recommend it because it's a good solution that gives you security and is easy to use.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten. They respond to all of our needs. 

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. 

We use this solution for networks linking SMB Offices and remote access VPN.

They don't ever fail and they have a long service life.

The price is high and it should be improved.

I have been using this solution for twenty-five years.

The service is good.

Overall, I'm satisfied with this solution.

We are using Cisco Catalyst Switches for corporate and production, such as offices. We have two networks running and the second one is an Everts network and it is more specialized in TV video broadcasting.

Cisco Catalyst Switches has been very useful in my organization because we do a lot of videos. My company is a TV station. 

The solution could improve by having a video IP feature.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for approximately 30 years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are highly reliable and stable.

We have approximately 500 Cisco Catalyst Switches installed.

The support of Cisco Catalyst Switches is very good.

We are a large company and the price is reasonable because we have received a discount. However, the full price is expensive.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

My primary use case is to assign VLAN or a port for VLAN on the main network.

An area for improvement would be the documentation and training on configuring this product.

I've been using this solution for four or five years.

I've had no problems with the stability of this solution.

Scalability is fine.

The initial setup was complex because it was a common line.

Licenses are available on a three-yearly basis.

I would give this solution a score of nine out of ten.

We use Cisco Catalyst Switches for network connectivity.

The performance of Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

The only improvement I would like to see with Cisco Catalyst Switches is the pricing.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for five years.

We use Cisco Catalyst, 9000 series.

The stability of Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

In our organization, we have more than 7,000 users.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are quite scalable.

Technical support is excellent.

If there is one area where Cisco excels, it is in technical support.

We use Dropbox occasionally. OneDrive is mainly what we use. We also, use Teams.

The installation is straightforward. It's plug-and-play.

To deploy and maintain Cisco Catalyst Switches, we have a team of four people, which includes one manager and three administrators.

You can install Cisco Catalyst Switches yourself.

We pay the licensing fees annually because we have an enterprise license agreement.

There are other products that I personally prefer, but from an organization's perspective, I would recommend this solution.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of ten.