Cisco Catalyst Switches Reviews

We're using it as basic switches - mainly VLANs and SPB, The main focus is actually for just VLANs and VLAN switching, and that's it.

There are a lot of features on the device. We're not using all the features that we can use, however.

It's all fine. It works quite well. What we have now is good. We don't have many requirements for these switches except just forwarding traffic.

The solution has been very stable.

We find the product to be scalable.

Technical support is very responsive and helpful.

The solution is very reliable.

Pricing mainly is the only issue. For our company, IT is not a major investment, so it would be harder to convince management to invest in Cisco switches. For quality, they are the best, however, in terms of pricing, especially due to the COVID crisis and everything, investment into a network is now a lower priority. Before, when the money flow was better, it was easier to sell. However, now, for this current situation, a major point of pain in the company is price. 

Even though my priority is reliability, in order to avoid downtime, management is harder to convince and they just see the price tag. 

We've been using the solution since about 2018. It's been around four years or so now.

The solution is very stable. Since 2018, since we started with them, we haven't faced any issues with these switches, except for one instance where we switched to a new switch and needed to restart to enable the functionality.

Other than that, the switches are working great. There were only two times we restarted them due to an incident with the power equipment. The switches restarted because of a power issue, and not due to the switch itself having a problem.

The solution is scalable. We're actually using it using iStack. It is stackable and very scalable to add more switches. It's quite easy to expand everything.

We're using these for our core network. It's across all our core network that is going through our IT department. For that reason, many people are on them. It's likely about 50 people 50, plus the user traffic. We're an ISP. We have some servers and portals that use these servers, switches to reach the network. Therefore, many, many users use that. We have a lot of user traffic going through the switches.

The technical support is fine. We've had, several moments in these last four years where we've requested Cisco technical support and they were very quick to respond and provide assistance. It's taken, at a maximum, two days to go from request to support. they are very responsive. We are very satisfied with their level of service.

As I understand, Cisco's prices are very high and other vendors might have a lower price. Therefore, we're considering Aruba or Huawei or maybe other vendors as well for both access switches and managed wireless solutions (as in lightweight access points with controllers and these kinds of networks). 

Due to the wireless network upgrade, I'm considering other measures as well as Cisco. We're considering Aruba and we're considering Huawei. I'm considering switching to other vendors mainly because of the price.

We are a customer and an end-user.

We deal with a lot of Cisco products. We use maybe 20 or so Cisco switches.

We have an old 2960-X and a 2960 Plus. We also have three 9300 switches, which are the newer model.

I would advise other users to plan for a larger network than you currently need. For example, if you need 20 ports on a switch and you're ordering this equipment. order a 48 port one, as you'll find that you quickly consume the 20 ports and you need upgrades of two, three, four, five, six. You'll need upgrades quickly and you'll find yourself ordering another switch to replace this one. The most sensible recommendation is to order one bigger switch, which is better than replacing the switch you have within one year. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. The switches are excellent.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is used for large networks with 48 ports for example.

More than just a few switches on a small scale, they can be used on the main switch of a small or medium-sized business. It is determined by the size. It's heavy-duty, you only need to configure it once, and it'll keep running for several years. We have run it for ten years with no problems.

With Cisco Catalyst Switches, everything is working perfectly. We have not had issues with this solution. 

Everything I need is available.

For the time being, Cisco Catalyst Switches are working well, but they are not PoE switches, which is why we would consider replacing them.

If I were to change later, I would go with the PoE version.

We have been using Cisco Catalyst Switches in my company for more than 10 years.

Cisco Catalyst Switches is a stable solution.

Cisco Catalyst Switches are scalable.

With the exception of WiFi, we have 40 users connected. We have small switches in some offices, and some users are connected to these small switches via a single cable that leads to the Catalyst.

Currently, we have no plans to increase our usage.

Technical support is easygoing.

We have experience with Cisco and TP-Link.

It is easy to implement on the network, and easy to work with. It is not complicated.

There is little to no maintenance required.

There are no licensing fees required.

I was looking for the UniFi switch or access point because it was the first time I heard of it, so I was looking for feedback on it in comparison to TP-Link and Cisco.

It's one of the best switches, professional and fast. I would recommend these switches to others who are considering using them.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for switching. Some devices are used for ethernet connections. Some we're using with our data center. For example, it's what's in use in the data center. It's got quite a few different applications.

I work in security with various switches and routers, and I find the product, without getting into too much detail, quite secure.

It's a stable solution.

We find the product to be scalable.

The device itself is quite good and reliable.

The security is very good.

Its implementation is quite simple as there's good documentation you can reference. 

The cost of the product is a little high. They should work to lower it a bit.

There's a ban on my country and therefore I can't get Cisco support if I need it. It's not allowed.

I've been using the solution for more than 15 years at this point. 

In terms of stability, the solution has been reliable. We haven't had issues with bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. the performance is pretty good overall.

For our purposes, the solution has been scalable. You can expand it if you need to.

We have more than 1,000 people using the switches. 

We tend not to have to worry about dealing directly with technical support. If we run into issues, we tend to reference the technical documentation and that always has included any information we've needed to find the answers we need ourselves. 

That's important as Cisco does not offer direct support to my country. We are banned from getting support services delivered to us.

I'm also familiar with Huawei devices.

That said, we only really technically deal with Cisco switches.

The installation of Cisco is easy. They have great official documentation and have a good design overall which makes it easy for everyone who needs to run the installation.

It takes about five to ten minutes to install a switch for our technical personnel.

The team that can deploy and manage the switches include ten to 20. That includes managers and technical support people.

The solution can be a bit pricey. That said, I can't speak to exact pricing as a different department handles licensing details. 

We are using various versions of the solution. We don't just use one kind. We have many different ones.

I'm not sure if I would recommend the solution to others. Cisco is a large and technical company. A switch that is just as good with less trouble is Huawei.

That said, I've had no issues with it and would rate the product at a ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our server. It's a network solution as well.

It's a very popular solution.

We find the product very easy to configure.

The stability is very good.

The product can scale quite well. 

Cisco is basically the number one switch in the market. It makes it hard for other options to compete. 

The solution is expensive. Sometimes we will choose some cheaper options even though they are not as stable as Cisco's offering. However, if it is a small project, it may not be worth paying Cisco prices to get it done.  

I've used the solution for two or three years at this point. 

I have found the solution to be very stable. The performance is good. It doesn't crash or freeze. it's reliable. 

The scalability has been excellent. A company shouldn't have any issues with expanding it if they need to.

We have three to five people that directly work with this product.

We already use so many Catalyst switches. I'm not sure if we intend to add any more. 

We don't really need any support as we have a network engineer on staff that can help us troubleshoot if we have issues. 

I can't speak to the initial setup. In terms of the installation process, we have a network engineer that will help us to install the switches when we need them.

The solution is expensive. There are other cheaper switches on the market. However, they may not necessarily be as stable as this option. 

When you buy the Cisco, the price already includes a software license.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using. It might be the latest.

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. I've been pleased with its capabilities overall. 

The most valuable features include the redundancy one and the spanning tree. We also use the power over the ethernet. Moreover, we like the RRP, virtual redundant routing and GLBP, which are primarily on the Cisco Switches.

In the future it would be nice to see a dynamic VLAN database that's not managed by another, say, Cisco product.

I would like for Cisco to come up with an affordable dynamic VLAN solution. This would mainly serve the purpose of network access control. My thinking is along the lines of that of my colleagues, that there are non-Cisco infrastructures available which are more affordable. This would give us the option of using Cisco Catalyst or of moving on to the competition. 

Cisco ACI is a feature I would also like to see. When it comes to automation, it would be good to be able to use Ansible or Puppet to run one's network and enforce compliance. Roadmap is the way to go, especially when it comes to network engineers. I would be very pleased if Cisco were to enable its product to work with these automation tools. This is where the challenge lies in deployment for most network engineers. Automation is key. 

I have been working with Cisco Catalyst Switches for around 13 or 14 years.

The solution is very stable, durable and resilient. We had many issues in regards to other people and products and upgraded these solution so that they would be on par with Cisco.

I have not had to make use of direct technical support. Mainly I have taken advantage of the one which is online and this works very well for me. There are no issues to report. It has provided me with much assistance, especially the forum, and I would rate it as pretty good. 

We have worked with switches from other vendors, specifically SP and Ubiquiti. Then we worked with Cisco, as well. However, multiple infrastructure mainly applies to Cisco and this is in accordance with our enterprise standards. This means that we deploy Cisco for all sites that we take over.

When it comes to the access points side, we found Cisco to be a bit pricey and have utilized a different product that we combined with the Cisco switches. 

The pricing is on the high end. Recently, at the beginning of this year, we actually did a  comparison of Cisco and HP products. As far as I see it, given the same specifications and features, Cisco is comparatively expensive.

Cisco delivers when it comes to business value. So, I would advise others to go for it. But, they should be aware of budgetary considerations vis-a-vis the pricing. This is key. 

The product is one which delivers, especially as concerns large enterprise networks that put an emphasis on visibility and the time it takes for deployment and reaction to situations. Keeping this in mind, I would say that Cisco Analyst is the best for me. 

I rate Cisco Catalyst Switches as an 8.5 out of ten. 

We have Cisco Catalyst 2960 series. We're using them for core switches at two locations. We are also using them as endpoint switches and distribution switches. 

The warranty and continued firmware support are most valuable.

Their centralized management could be better. There should be some kind of software for centralized management so that I don't need somebody else to manage it.

We have been running them for 12 years.

They are extremely stable. We've been running them for 12 years, and we lost the uptime only due to power loss. We had only one of them go bad, and it was through the lightning.

It is very scalable. We have at least one in every building, and we have over 70 buildings that we maintain. Some buildings have even up to five of these.

Their tech support is great. We never had any issues. It is also easy to find a solution by using their community forums. Because Cisco is so widely used, you can find answers for any issue online.

It was straightforward.

The price of these switches is on the upper end. It is around $3,500 plus for a 24-Port switch. These switches are more expensive than Linksys and TP-Link, but you get what you pay for. If you look at the pros and cons per switch, you can justify the cost compared to a lesser and cheaper brand.

I would rate Cisco Catalyst Switches an eight out of ten.

We are a solution provider and Cisco Catalyst Switches are one of the network products that we provide to our clients. Within the past year, we have implemented Catalyst 2960 switches and Cisco 1900 Series routers.

I am implementing complex solutions with the Catalyst series that include the Spanning Tree Protocol. I build these solutions for educational institutions that are servicing professors and students, including wireless services.

The performance is good for complex solutions.

The most valuable feature is load balancing.

The integration with other brands is good.

I would like to see a graphical user interface for the configuration. This is something that other brands and models have.

I have worked with the Cisco brand for the past seven years.

I am fine with the stability. With the protocol that was implemented, the network has not gone down.

Scalability is good and is suitable for an enterprise network.

My clients are normally small companies.

I don't usually contact technical support. I am familiar with the forum, so I search there when I need information. The documentation, manuals, and community support are all good.

My client is using switches from MikroTik and Ubiquiti access points. We have also dealt with other vendors, including Cisco and Huawei, in the delivery of solutions to our customers. My clients choose Cisco because of the stability and performance.

I have also worked with telecom enterprises in the past, which included working with Cisco products Catalyst and Nexus. 

I have worked with these switches and know how to configure them.

The length of time required for deployment depends on the size of the network. For a network of 15 switches, it takes me two or three days to configure.

The price is too high for this market. Catalyst switches are more expensive than the competing options.

I am currently evaluating several options for my client. Their goal is to improve the reliability and architecture of the network, to give them improved scalability and performance. They need a good switch, but the budget is small so I am searching for the most cost-economical one that suits their needs. In fact, for them, the price is essential now.

Overall, these switches are very good. I like to work with them because they have advanced capabilities. I recommend this product because Cisco has proprietary protocols and we are happy with them.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

LAN access, distribution and core. 

We are Cisco partner and sell Cisco solutions, we have sold this platform for last 20 years. Its quite robust and work in worst environmental conditions.

In terms of the switches, the uptime and the robustness of the hardware are the most valuable aspects. 

Cisco devices are quite good. They do not fail specially the Catalyst Switches. 

The solution offers quite a robust infrastructure, hardware-wise. 

Cisco provides very good support services.

Cisco is improving and investing in R&D right now. They are investing a lot in research, and keep improving their products.

For example, they have recently launched the SDA, SDWAN, ACI etc. Software Defined-Solutions, in which you can automate your operations and enhance your operations, and avoid manual stuff.

With their constant innovation and investment in R&D, there isn't really very much the solution isn't lacking or building upon in terms of features.

The pricing could be better.

We've been using Catalyst for long time. It's a very old Cisco brand, I have been deploying catalyst switches for last 20 years. 

The solution is extremely stable.

You can scale the solution quite well. It's good in that regard.

We're quite happy with their support services. They also offer very good documentation.

Since we are reseller / partner we sell different vendors solutions.

The initial setup is very easy.

On top of that, they have complete documentation available on their website. Whatever scenario you are deploying, you can search for an example of it on their website. That can help guild you during the process.

We are reseller / partner.

licensing model is changing from perpetual licenses to subscription based licensing. Subscription based licensing model is cheaper but reoccur every year or 3, 5 or 7 years.  

Not relevant.