Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

We have different use cases for different verticals. Our network is built mainly on Cisco equipment, including switches, firewalls, and routers. Most of the devices are Cisco products.

The product is stable, and it performs well. We get support and patches from Cisco. It is going well. We have different companies and different verticals. Cisco is our backbone.

The support team’s response and resolution time must be faster.

I have been using this solution for eight to ten years. We are using the industry-standard version.

When we have more than 1000 Cisco Catalyst Switches, we have a failure rate, too. We would hardly notice failure if we had a smaller company with one to ten switches. A couple of times, it has happened that the switches have failed while upgrading.

We design the network according to the environment's requirements. We also keep the network ready for the business requirements. When a request comes in, we help customers get their devices into a specific network zone. We have a huge number of users. My company caters to its internal customers, including JioMart, Jio Payments Bank, and JioChat.

The support is good so far.

We configure and deploy the solution according to our needs. If a product or feature is not available, we discuss and open a ticket with Cisco. Cisco then helps with some patches or other features that we require.

The procurement process for Cisco Catalyst Switches is different. Once we receive the switches in bulk, we divide them among the different verticals. Depending on the needs, we allocate 100 or 1000 switches to each vertical and then start deploying.

I help the team to deploy the solution. We have a different deployment process. When a user requests a deployment, we first discuss their network and how they want it distributed. We then discuss the feasibility of the request and suggest the best possible option available to meet their requirements.

We have an on-premises team who helps us if there is an issue with the device. If the team cannot resolve the issue, we either get a replacement device or ask an expert for help with deployment. If there is a requirement to use multicast streaming, we need to check if our current network supports it. We also need to consider the bandwidth, network resources, and uplink and downlink ports.

The pricing should be improved. We have purchased a one-time license. When we place an order for Cisco Catalyst Switches, the quantity is huge.

I am an implementer. I would recommend the solution to others. People must use the solution based on their requirements. Overall, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.

We are mostly using the Cisco Catalyst 2900 Series, but some are the new 900 Series and a mixture of a lot of solutions. More than 300 people are working on Cisco Catalyst switches.

Catalyst switches are highly reliable. They have a good product life, they are balanced overall compared to others.

We sometimes have issues using Cisco Catalyst switches in a mixed environment. For example, we are using Fortinet's firewall, so if we jump to Cisco, then we have a problem. If we need another solution for MAC filtering, we need to go for IEEE or AAA. 

Cisco needs to improve compatibility with other solutions and other vendors like SolarWinds. We've had problems using Catalyst with SolarWinds. Some devices can't be put on SolarWinds due to some ID Values and so on. 

They need to show some flexibility because no environment depends on one product. And when we add new solutions for monitoring, troubleshooting, etc., we need integration with our Cisco devices. I think it would be great if Cisco could improve its integration with other vendors in the future.

We've used Cisco Catalyst for the last four years. 

Cisco Catalyst switches are stable. No question about it.

TAC is a wonderful service. They are cooperative and professional. They do great in the case of RMA or case of troubleshooting.

We tried Juniper HP and some other solutions.

Setting up Catalyst switches is complex. We have about four or five Cisco-certified technicians to look after these things.

The price of Cisco Catalyst switches is reasonable. 

I rate Cisco Catalyst seven out of 10. I definitely recommend Cisco switches as a complete solution. 

This solution is capable of high-quality L2 & L3 switching at several different layers of our enterprise with a high rate of availability and reliability.

It has excellent dynamic routing capabilities. We manage a large WAN environment that requires the use of OSPF.

Cisco Catalyst Switches perform these two functions very well.

The most valuable feature of this solution is managed switching.

We rely on heavy segmentation to secure and isolate several business units.

The dynamic routing capabilities are excellent.

Licensing is somewhat expensive and should be improved. Cisco should provide customers with a more advantageous licensing model included with the purchase of the equipment.

They have done some good by providing low-cost multiyear DNA center licenses with the purchases and have increased the number of benefits provided with the HW warranty, but must still work on lowering smart-net cost.

This solution is extremely stable.

The technical support for this solution is excellent. They are very knowledgeable, courteous, and adamant to meet their SLA.

I have used non-Cisco equipment, especially in the IoT environment of this municipality. In my experience, the competition falls short when it comes to features and reliability.

In the enterprise environment, there are several others that compare to Cisco and it is up to you to pick the right solution for your environment. For me, it is all related to budgeting, previous environment, expertise, and training needs.

The initial setup of this solution was simple. I included professional services and cross-training for my team.

We have experience in both cases.

 More complex and mission-critical deployments are handled by consultants. Less complicated deployments are handled by our staff.

ROI for this solution is excellent.

My HW lifecycle schedule is seven years. Some of these switches stay in production and performing ultimately for ten years.

Try to buy everything you need in bulk purchases and ask Cisco for volume discounts.

Prior to choosing this solution, I evaluated the IoT environment Antaira, Cradlepoint, and Sierra Wireless. Cisco's solution was superior.

In an enterprise environment, I have evaluated Juniper, Extreme, and HP. Cisco's solution fit my operational, budgeting, and logistic needs better.

This is a solid solution.

When choosing them vs others, it all depends on your budgeting, previous environment, expertise, and training needs.

In the market, if you are deploying any kind of network in an environment, there is a need for switches to distribute the network. You can use a switch to distribute the entire connection to other users in the company if you have a small company.

I can't think of an area where improvements are required in the product since Cisco seems to be regularly involved in patching the software part. Cisco Catalyst Switches releases regular software updates, so there shouldn't be any issue with the solution.

It is not easy for everyone to configure the product's initial setup part, making it an area where improvements are required.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for three years. I am a customer of Cisco.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight or nine out of ten.

The product is not easy for everyone to configure the initial setup. Sometimes, it becomes a pain point when people are not able to understand everything related to the product, and they run into certain issues, making it a reason why I would say that the tool is not that stable.

Cisco's support team is good and can provide you with solutions quickly since Cisco has not given its support area to vendors. All of Cisco's support teams are handled by Cisco's employees. Cisco has support centers all around the globe, including countries like India, Singapore, Australia, and Europe. As a customer of the switches and routers from Cisco, my company gets twenty-four hours and seven days a week of access throughout the year to contact the support team and its engineers, who are well-trained before they get deployed on the queue to pick up the customer cases.

I rate the technical support a nine and a half out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with switches from NETGEAR and Sophos, but both products can provide detailed functionalities or features like Cisco Catalyst Switches. The functionality and features you get with Cisco Catalyst Switches are incomparable to other tools.

The product's initial setup phase was a bit difficult. A subject matter expert might be required to help with the initial setup phase.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model. The product works fine if you have experience with Cisco Catalyst Switches.

The solution can be deployed in a few hours. For the basic deployment, it takes a couple of hours.

The solutions are costly, considering that Cisco provides top-notch support and devices.

Cisco Catalyst Switches have impacted our company's network flexibility since it is a very flexible product. The solution is robust in terms of the equipment provided. As per my knowledge, no other switch provides the same functionalities that Cisco Catalyst Switches provide in the current market.

In terms of network security in our company, I would speak about the number of VLANs that users can probably have on Cisco Catalyst Switches and how we can manage the traffic going from one VLAN to another VLAN, which is a very smooth process with no issues. When you look at network security, the way Cisco implements SCP is tremendous since it has many features that one can use that are not available in other legacy products.

The performance and reliability of Cisco to support our company's critical applications are areas of the tool that can be described as top-notch.

In terms of the tool's management and configuration, if a person is into the networking field and works as a network engineer who has probably dealt with CCNA or CCNP certifications with experience for a couple of years, it will be very easy to use. Cisco Catalyst Switches might be a little difficult for a newbie to learn. Once a person learns about the product in a month or so, everything related to the solution becomes easy.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it, especially the ones who don't have budget constraints and have people or teams who are well-versed in handling devices from Cisco.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

We mainly use it for user access in corporate offices, but we have been working on certain projects that require using XE access to support APIs and network connectivity. 

I highly appreciate the durability and the availability. It is also proven to be a very reliable solution that ensures stable and consistent network performance. 

Facilitating and adapting the security updates would be a good improvement because it usually requires use to reboot the router to get them. The whole process is slightly complex and it could be easier. 

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for ten years. 

It offers excellent stability. There are some switches with twenty years of uptime which is quite an impressive number. 

Catalyst Switches provide scalability and accommodate different network demands. 

The quality of the customer support that is provided depends on the line of the product and the model that is used. Sometimes, the first level of support is basic, but mostly it is good. Their customer service is available at all times. I rate it seven out of ten. 

Neutral

The initial setup might be significantly challenging for clients who are not familiar with its intricacies. Their advanced features and configuration options require knowledgeable IT professionals to implement them. 

Once the solution is set up, the process of deployment and configuration is almost seamless. It takes around one hour to be fully completed.

I find the price to be just right, it is not cheap, but it is not expensive. The solution provides a good balance between the features and the cost structure. They offer many options regarding the licensing so it is easy to choose one option that adapts to the needs of the customer. 

I strongly recommend this solution because it delivers high-performance switching, enabling fast data transfer rates with minor to no bugs. I rate it nine and a half out of ten. 

I use Cisco Catalyst Switches mostly in apartment complexes. They are apartment buildings, where one apartment has three or four bathroom/bedroom combinations and each resident who lives in those has their own connection to the switch. Additionally, the common areas of the building have a connection to the switch.

I've used Cisco Catalyst Switches in that environment, providing internet to a complex, both fiber and copper. We have taken and put cable TV, converted the satellite signals off of DIRECT TV satellites, and broadcasted all their channels, including local channels in the complex. There are approximately 250 channels through the same switches by converting the output to a network environment by turning them around and sending it back out on the other end for coaxial cable distribution. I've been working a lot in the MDFs and the IDFs of the individual complexes.

We use the VLANs to separate library, office, and individual apartments. With some of the reporting that receive, we're able to take and track down where people like to put in their own wireless routers. Sometimes they will take a DSL modem from AT&T that they brought from home, hook it in backward, and it will give rogue addresses causing issues.

It's been pretty easy for us to track down where those rogue addresses are coming from and shut the port down until we can have a technician go out and fix it properly.

There are a lot of features that Cisco Catalyst Switches have. However, they're not always needed.

The security of Cisco Catalyst Switches seems to be sound. It's very good with security. I've had no issues, security-wise. The important this is to know what to do to fix problems if you have a security issue, and it seems to work, whether you're using Cisco Catalyst Switches, Opensense, pfSense firewalls, or any normal firewall issues. Cisco Catalyst Switches are able to communicate to all the other hardware very well.

I use the Cisco Catalyst Switches command-line interface(CLI) a lot out in the field, but there are some web interfaces features that are available that I haven't used very much. I'm more comfortable with the CLI, but the web interfaces are very lacking. 

The application controls that you have when you go through the Cisco Catalyst Switches for configuration and to see your whole network could improve. If the interface could display and recognize devices other than the Catalyst that you might have in the network to allow you to build your network. It does not necessarily need to control them, but to see they're there and how they're hooked up would make a big difference when it comes to trying to map and monitor the network activity in the system.

Those are two areas I find in the Cisco Catalyst Switches that are not as robust as some of the newer solutions, such as Aruba. You could see everything's controlled by the web interfaces, but not as much by the CLI. I don't like that Arubas CLIs, but I do like the web interface where you can see everything and control everything without having to load a special application on a computer and/or use the CLI. You can visually see all the information, and I find that's an easier learning curve for people monitoring. I haven't used it very much with the Cisco Meraki's, but a lot of the places we have worked have been with governments, and they use a lot of the Cisco Catalyst line of solutions.

If someone was trying to manage their own office, I would rate the usability of Cisco Catalyst Switches a five out of ten. Unless you know the CLI well then you will use the interface that is a little bit tricky to work with.

I have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches for approximately 10 years.

Most of the stability issues I have found have been hardware-related and not software. I have found that sometimes a port will go dead, and when a port goes dead on the even side, the odd side equivalent goes dead as well. This is where things get a little hot and it caused the solder joint to go loose or something similar happened. That's what my guess would be on the issue, a lot of times they only mark the port as dead and shut it off. When they have many ports that are dead that they don't have any spares they typically switch out the switch altogether.

People do not want to pay for you to resolder a circuit board and check for cold solder joints, I try and speed things up. If I have not had to use many spares on the ports for repair, to keep the repair at a quick pace. I can change a power supply or I can change a board in them quickly. I haven't actually bothered to go through and see if it's a cold solder joint or if it's actually a dead port. I'm having to use my experience with other equipment and knowing that it more times than not, kills both ports on the same connector, it's probably a cold solder joint or something to do with where it's connecting to the motherboard. This would be the first place I would look.

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

They are highly stable, they have never given me a problem.

I've never had to talk with the Cisco technical support. Usually, if there is a problem I know how the switches are built, I can take them apart and put them together to fix them. For example, in the last Cisco solution I did fix, the power supply was overheating, and it would eventually shut the unit down or it would freeze. I let it cool off and came back when it was cool and took a power supply from one that the mainboard that was frozen, and put it in. It came right back up and it was working at the right temperature.

When it comes to technical support, I've never had to use them. What typically happens is the client calls technical support, technical support turns around dispatches a company that dispatches me and I go out there, fix the issue. I notify that company of their technical support, which may be Cisco's, or not, and inform them of the problem. The technical support double-checks the program and makes sure everything's up and operating.

I have used other networking solutions previously, such as Aruba.

I have found that the problems with Cisco Catalyst Switches are caused by the end-user putting equipment on it backward and various other similar user errors.  Cisco Catalyst Switches does not have all the features in the web interface. I didn't see the web interface able to be controlled the solution well. You can bring up some information controls, you click a link, and everything's in it is confusing to me, they could improve it. The web application gives you the ability to change some settings, but not necessarily critical ones. There're some things that you have to do at the CLI that their application does not give you the ability to do.

I have VLANs that are set up in my office under a pfSense firewall. The VLANs are set up in the firewall, and it acts as a switch as well. The actual switches turn around and act as a router and then the Cisco Catalyst Switches recognize the VLANs, and process everything accordingly as if it was a Cisco solution. They integrate well will all other hardware.

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We have not deployed on the cloud because the company's core business is on yachts. Yachts are not familiar with the cloud and online solutions.

We have been integrating Cisco Catalyst Switches in yachts that are 100 feet in length to 100 meters in length. With simple infrastructure such as two or three switches connected with copper, and with large infrastructures we use a three-layer level with the backbone of a multimode fiber.

The switches are related to simple switching infrastructures, without the implementation of routing protocols. The routing protocols are referring to routers and layer three switches. They are not required with this kind of infrastructure.

I like the management of streaming both audio and video. On a yacht, the network infrastructure is not related to data usage, it is mainly for audio, video management, and distribution. 

When compared with other brands, they are not as reliable as Cisco Catalyst Switches.

There is always something better. The price could be better.

The service contract for technical support should be included for at least the first year of purchasing the product.

I have been working with Cisco Catalyst Switches for more than ten years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are reliable. It is very stable and performant. There have only been a few failures. In general, there is a very low level of failure.

If we refer to shipyards, then we have six or seven shipyards in Italy and outside of Italy. When referring to Yachts, I have installed these switches on more than 100 to 200 Yachts.

Technical support is very fast and highly skilled.

The only issue with the support is that without an active service contract, they will not address any of your concerns. Even if you are a Cisco partner, they will not address your concerns without an active technical contract.

For networking and switching, we have used most Cisco solutions.

For Unified Communications, we have used BE6000 and 4000. 

Switching solutions we the new brand 9000. 

We started with the low level 9200 to 9500. We use the Cisco Firewall ASA 2100 and we have Wi-Fi solutions such as the Wireless LAN controllers 2500,3500, and 9800.

At one time, we also integrated Nexus switches.

In the past, my company used to propose low-level Cisco products such as Linksys. They were not reliable and the return on investment was not as high as Catalyst. This strategy was a failure.

The physical installation is not difficult. There are four factors for all devices that are almost the same. The main factor is the configuration.

If you speak with someone who has five to six years of experience in Cisco products, it is really fast. If you have someone with little experience then it takes longer. Cisco Catalyst Switches can be configured using the command-line interface and not the web interface. The web interface would be fine for people who do not have a lot of experience with the product.

Using the command-line interface is a faster way to configure for skilled people who have experience, and not for technicians who are not as experienced.

It requires a complete team from the beginning. This includes the system engineer, the installer technician, the standard technician, and two or three IT engineers to configure and maintain these switches. 

The price for Cisco Catalyst Switches is not cheaper than other solutions.

Licensing fees are something that you pay at the time of purchase. During the year, I have not had any customers request to renew the license. I have only had customer requests to activate our systems contract when there has been an issue with the device. Cisco products have been shown to be very reliable and stable. It's something that rarely has to be activated.

I think that the price should be cheaper and they should include at least one year of basic service for technical support for each product, and not just the 90 days from the time of purchase.

Oftentimes, when my company purchases the Cisco products, they are not installed until three or four months after the date of purchase. The installation is done at least one year after the building and delivery of the Yacht which makes the warranty is not useful.

I would recommend these switches to others. Over the years, I have been working with Cisco, and Aruba HP Enterprise devices. I can say that if you use Cisco, you will have good results and reliability. With comparisons, I would suggest not to use Linksys products if you don't have a stable environment, and you have an environment that is moving all over the world such as a Yacht.

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

We primarily use the solution for the switching capabilities.

The initial setup of the product is pretty simple and straightforward.

The solution is adding more automation capabilities.

The quality of a Cisco switch is very high. They are extremely stable.

Cisco should work to lower its costs. It's quite expensive right now. They force the customer to buy the DNA license and that shouldn't be the case.

Instead of making automation cheaper, they are making it more expensive and clients don't like it.

They really need to simplify their licensing and simplify moving to a controller base. 

The scalability is limited.

Cisco also owns Meraki, however, they keep these switches as separate products, and customers are confused by that. Meraki has a lot of features and a customer questions why those features are there and not here. Meraki also allows for more integrations with solutions such as HP, and it's harder to integrate Cisco. 

The same is true of Nexus switches, which basically do the same thing and yet everything is siloed. It's confusing for the clients. 

I've been using the solution for about 20 years. It's been two decades. I've had a lot of time to get to know the product.

Cisco switches are of very high quality, which makes them very stable. It's a very strong selling point for the product. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It's very reliable.

The scalability is limited. There are other solutions that can do it better. Cisco is not number one in this respect - especially as more companies head toward the cloud. Luxul, for example, offers better scalability - if that is what a company is looking for.

We tend to use the solution quite extensively.

I've used Cisco for 20 years or so and therefore have had encounters with technical support. I would note that the first 15 or so years had been very great and I would describe them as very helpful and responsive. However, as of the last five years, I find they are going south. They aren't as good as they used to be. It's still okay. It's just not as good as it was.

Whereas in the past I've given them five out of five stars, now I would rate them at a four.

We didn't previously use a different solution. We're mostly a Cisco shop.

The initial setup is not overly complex. To set up a switch is not a big issue. I see Cisco is trying to go into the DNA to do some automation.  

Every site is different in terms of deployment and the number of switches/users. On every site, we have two engineers and we're also doing web support. The setup is a one-time thing and the switches are pretty stable, and therefore it doesn't take us much time to do an implementation so long as there are no hardware failures.

I handled the implementation myself. I did not need the assistance of a consultant or implementor. I have enough experience to handle it at this point.

I've used a few different switches and I wouldn't say that you necessarily get a better ROI just because you use Cisco.

The cost of the solution is quite high. There are other cheaper options. On Cisco, you're paying probably double or triple times the cost. 

Many people don't like the complexity. It should be simpler and offer a low cost. The reason people are looking for automation is that they are looking to lower costs, however, if you go to Cisco solutions, the automation solution is very expensive. This is the opposite of the customer expectations.

I do not do the purchasing directly and therefore I can't estimate an exact cost for the product.

I've used Juniper and HPE switches, and, if you were to compare them, I'd say there isn't too much of a difference. The functionality is pretty much the same.

You can also compare the solution to Luxul, which has better scalability.

We are a customer.

Cisco tries to move clients over to their own ecosystem so that they are only using Cisco from end-to-end.

The solution is very good for enterprises, however, it might be a bit much for a small company that may only need one switch.

If the costs are not a concern for an organization, I would recommend the product.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been very happy with the stability on offer, however, the pricing isn't the greatest and the licensing is confusing.