Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

The solution is very easy to use. We've found that it isn't overly technical and is, in fact, quite user-friendly.

The product is extremely flexible.

The stability of the solution has been very good. We've found the performance to be very reliable. 

The initial setup is mostly pretty straightforward. It's not overly complex.

The product is very robust.

The configuration setup is a little more complex if you go into detail.

The price is something we would definitely like improved. It would be nice if it was more economical.

I've been using the solution for about four years or so. It's been a while. I've had some time with the technology and am pretty comfortable with it.

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We like the performance. It's reliable.

We have about 50 people using the solution currently.

I previously Juniper switches. I am not using them anymore. I was using them about three years ago.

The initial setup is okay. It's not overly difficult. The configuration can be a bit tricky, however, depending on the complexity involved.

The pricing could be improved.  It's a bit high right now. 

A lot of my colleagues are using Cisco switches. I often touch base with them to share know-how on the technology.

I'm not using the latest version of the solution. I'm using an older version right now.

On a scale from one to ten, I'd rate the solution at a nine. We've been quite pleased with the solution overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users, companies, and organizations. It's quite robust and flexible.

We primarily use the solution for networking and the UCS.

The solution is extremely reliable as a product. The clients very much appreciate that.

The configuration is easy.

The solution is customizable.

We've found the solution to be stable.

A company can scale a solution easily.

Technical support has been very helpful.

The solution is quite expensive for our clients. It's a pain point for some companies. They should work to reduce the price.

I've been using the solution for a long while. I've used the solution basically since its inception.

We haven't had any issues with the stability of the solution. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable.

We typically deploy the solution to medium to large-scale enterprises.

The solution scales well. It's not hard for a company to expand it as they need to.

We've been in touch with technical support in the past. We've found them to be helpful and responsive. They are quite helpful and very polite. We're very satisfied with the level of support we receive.

I'm not a technical person. I didn't actually handle the initial installation for our organization.

There is little to no ongoing maintenance required once it is implemented. I'd say you have 1% to 2% of effort going into maintenance. 

We've found the solution to be quite expensive. 

We are a premium partner with Cisco.

We use various versions of the solution. It depends on the client. We have multiple clients and each instance is unique.

It's deployed both on-premises and on the cloud.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations. We've mostly been quite happy with the product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

I am a student as well as a researcher at a university. I use this solution for various simulations. I am using the latest version of this solution. We have 10 to 15 technical people in our team. 

It is a stable and good product. It is also easy to install.

Its price can be improved. It is currently expensive.

I have been using this solution for two to three years.

It is stable.

I didn't use any technical support.

It was easy to install. It wasn't complex. It took about 10 to 20 minutes.

It is expensive.

I would recommend this solution. It is a good product. There are a lot of users of Cisco solutions in Pakistan. 

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

The switches are the easiest to deploy and maintain out of other competitors.

In terms of technology, Cisco is the leader in everything. I'd rather buy a second-hand Cisco switch than a brand new switch from a competitor. They're that reliable and resilient.

Cisco offers many ranges of switches and you'd know exactly if you were buying an access switch or a core switch distribution. They are definitely among the top companies. They just know how to predict things and what will evolve in the following years.

Out of the competition, Cisco switches are easily the most expensive.

There's something at Cisco called a console that is used for basic configuration and everything and I think that they excluded a normal USB. Instead of that micro USB they should put in the normal one. It would make things a bit easier.

I've had experience dealing with the solution since 2010. It's been about ten years now.

The stability of Cisco is unmatched. We don't experience bugs or glitches or have any issues. There's been no worry of crashing. The technology is impeccable.

The scalability is quite good. We've never had any issues with scaling if necessary.

If the company pays for a given device's Smart Net - that's Cisco's official name for support -  then the support provided is huge. It could be challenging for people that want to fix an old switch or a router but do not have paid support anymore. That's not the case for us. I do think Cisco could be a bit better at assisting in those instances instead of just putting customers in a position where they have to buy a new device where an old one just needs a repair. Beyond that, we have no complaints and have been satisfied with the level of service they provide.

For me personally, the initial setup was very straightforward. I have experience with the product so it helps. if you are a user who has the experience, it shouldn't be too difficult to implement. Otherwise, you will have to spend some time learning about it and how it works.

Everything depends on the size of the network that you want to design and implement. Of course, you need a consultant if you need something with 200 users or so. Or if you don't have any expertise in IT. The question is, is Cisco switch easier or harder to configure than some other brand or our vendor? And the answer is that, in my opinion, Cisco switches are not among the easiest ones to deploy, however, they are definitely the most reliable switches. 

Cisco is easily one of the most expensive on the market, but users are buying quality and reliability.

The company I work with is a Premium Cisco partner. I've even based my career around Cisco vendors.

The solution is on a Private Cloud that we are renting (including equipment and the data center space and the LANs). We have obtained everything from Alban India, and our customers are mostly on our product site with the cloud. The customers include various financial companies, payment providers, etc. We're a systems integrator.

I would easily rate the solution ten out of ten. It's really great.

In terms of advice for other companies, I'd say that whether Cisco would work for them or not depends on the size of the network they want to cover. The small and midsize network users just really don't need to spend that amount of money on Cisco equipment, but the larger organizations and mission-critical environments definitely require Cisco.

The use case is for user access. It's good, it's performing very well.

Catalyst functions as a core and the main benefit for us is the performance, having multiple users.

The main valuable features for me are

• the ease of configuration
• CLI
• GUI.

My dream is to have the netflow in the port, for the administration and the utilization of user traffic, similar to the Meraki.

It's very scalable. It's very easy to cover all the services.

We chose Catalyst because we are looking to the future.

When selecting a vendor, the most important criteria for me are the post-sale support as well as the price.

Catalyst is very expensive.

For our company, Cisco's competition was Aruba.

The configuration is simple and the support is good. The equipment for networking is the best for an organization. It's working very well.

I rate Catalyst at 10 out of 10 because of the performance and support.

The use case will depend on the customer's requirements. Generally, if they want the access layer, the 2960 works pretty well. If they are in the SMB market, we go with the SZ series which is okay. If the primary use case is more on the PoE side, Catalyst switches give the most. And with respect to two-port, the 2960 is better.

With respect to the technology, when we talk about DNA and SDN as a whole concept, that is where, as a partner, our pitching point is, where we can show our edge to the customer. For example, if we are providing a switching solution, it's not just switching, it's a whole solution with DNA. That is where the whole concept of Network Management and Network Assurance comes in. So Catalyst plays a big role in putting everything together and providing a whole solution to the customer. 

Regarding security, with Stealthwatch, Catalyst switches play an important role as well.

When we talk to the customer, giving a full solution is important. From the switching to the network DNA to the security, I can deliver the whole thing with Cisco. That is how I position things when I go to the customer. We don't just go and talk about switches. We talk about the total solution that Cisco can give.

One good feature is UPOE. Another is having a built-in controller, the customer doesn't have to ask for another controller. For example, you get a built-in controller with the C650. And two-port is one of the premium factors from Cisco.

Something I like about the 2960-XR is that you get a lot of Layer 3 features.

One issue is that the competition is giving a lifetime warranty, whereas Cisco has a limited warranty on most of it.

Also, Dell switching is coming up with a solution where you can put your own OS inside their switching infra. That is where they are talking about open networking. We can show that our Cisco is also an open-source. We are open to different switching operating systems if the customer is willing to put it in. We can support multiple operating systems inside the switching infrastructure. It removes the hardware and software dependency on each other. That is where I think there is room for improvement so we can talk about open networking. Cisco should also come up with open networking access.

In terms of stability, Cisco is the premium solution in the market. It has a cost, but it gives you that stability. That is one thing Cisco has always delivered. That is without doubt, from my perspective and also from a customer perspective. They know that reliability and stability are prime features of Cisco.

I really haven't found any issues with respect to delivering the solution. If you talk about security I would give you a different picture. But with respect to just Catalyst, there are no issues. It is totally straightforward.

Pricing is an issue I have been facing, in comparison with HPE or Juniper. The Nexus series is out of the question right now. Scalability is more an issue on the pricing side and less on the technology side.

I will always tell you to go with Cisco Catalyst 9000 Series. That is the one to go with because you never know - any day, Cisco could make certain devices or certain components of a switch end-of-life. That is always a concern for our customers: "Are you giving me a product that is not end-of-life?. Will it not go end-of-life in the coming years? I need that assurance." I always tell customers to take a device that is very new so at least it's unlikely to go end-of-life in the near future.

So Catalyst 9000 is the one we are positioning because it has a lot of new features, plus it is new in the market. If a customer asks, "Should I go with 3850 or the 9000 Series, I will say that they should go with 9000 Series because the 3850 is an older version and costs almost the same. The 3850 has been on the market for a longer time. You never know when it will go end-of-life in the coming five years or seven years.

I would rate Catalyst at eight out of 10, from my experience. I have mentioned, above, a couple of things that Cisco can come up with, technically as well as commercially. All these aspects lead me to rate it an eight. Those technical and commercial differences mean we have to work hard.

• Security
• Configuration

At first glance this switch looks exactly like the an Ethernet switch, I would recommend that there be verbage in the documentation on exactly what gbit connectors are required.

We've been using it for eight years.

There have been no issues with the deployment.

The stability has never been an issue.

We've had no issues scaling it for our needs.

It's great.

It's great.

We didn't have anything in place and needed a fiber solution.

It was very straightforward.

We did it in-house with help from the vendor.

There were no other options looked at.

Make sure you get the right connectors.

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches for the connectivity of my client's local area network.

I have found that the protocols that Cisco Catalyst Switches support are beneficial for my customers.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for approximately one year.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is a stable solution.

I have found Cisco Catalyst Switches to be scalable.

We have five customers using Cisco Catalyst Switches.

The support from Cisco Catalyst Switches is good.

Cisco Catalyst Switches has a straightforward installation.

The pricing of Cisco Catalyst Switches could be better in general. There is an annual license required.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches a nine out of ten.