Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

We are a solution provider and Cisco Ethernet Switches are one of the products that we offer for our customers. With Cisco, there are two areas. There are gigabit switches, both managed and unmanaged, and there are 100 Mbps switches.

Generally, the Cisco switches available in India are L2 or L3. The L2 switch is mainly used for internet connectivity, for internet ISP users.

Technical support in India needs to be improved.

The stability is 100%. It's the number-one product in this regard. We plan to continue selling it in the future.

Our customers have between 2,000 and 2,500 users.

I'm not sure about other parts of the world, but in India, there is a problem with technical support for Cisco. There needs to be local support and it should be faster. At this time, in India, they give only remote support.

Cisco switch installation is very easy and it takes approximately half an hour to deploy.

This is a very expensive product. Without a license, part of the switch will not function.

In some of the latest switches, the warranty is not included in the pricing and we have to purchase it separately.

In summary, this is a good product that is very stable and I recommend it, but it's a costly switch.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

On-premises

We use these switches as part of our data center infrastructure.

These switches are stable and they have a good replacement service.

The support is good.

The procedures and handling of these switches are easy. Anything that you need to know is available in a Google search, or from the technical support.

The initial setup can be simplified.

We have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for approximately 10 years.

Stability is one of the key features of this product.

We are using the Cisco 4503-E and these switches are very scalable. There are some models that have plenty of ports.

Users do not connect directly to this switch. Rather, only servers are connected and we have perhaps 20 of them.

We also have experience with HPE switches. The HPE switches are okay, but Cisco is the best when it comes to things like the CLI. I prefer them.

Juniper is also a good company and they have good switches.

Cisco Switches are the best and I recommend them.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

On-premises

We use these switches in our data center core to handle all of the converged networks. They handle our SAN servers as well as other components.

The outer perimeter is handled by the Cisco 2960s, for distribution of traffic to endpoint clients.

These switches help to build the best network, the way we want it. There is a guarantee that makes us feel better about having a secure network.

The most valuable feature is the performance and ability to handle the flow of traffic.

The redundancy that the switches provide is very good.

There is a focus on improving the UI for managing the higher-end switches and routers, but not the traditional ones. Putting in a more complete management infrastructure would help when it comes to handling lower-end switches.

These switches are pretty expensive to put into place, so if they could bring the price point down then it would be really good.

We have been using Cisco Ethernet switches for just over ten years.

This solution very well handles the capability for scaling. It is fairly simple and easy to do.

Sometimes we have issues with certain switches hanging.

I have only indirectly been in contact with technical support through our vendor. Our interactions mostly had to do with registering the product and downloading updates. We have not been in contact concerning a particular issue about a product.

Our initial setup was more than ten years ago, and it is something that has been modified over time. Whatever it was, originally, has been rebuilt. As we continue to add new components, it becomes simpler and easier for us to go forward. 

The deployment for the data center core took four days to get all of the services up and running. This included the interfacing, as well as cutting over to ensure that there was no outage. A lot of this had to do with the waiting time and change control, where the cut-over was done during hours that are less used by the employees.

Our other primary switches were pretty simple to change, as and when required. This was never much of a dealy.

Our vendor assisted us with the original deployment. Our project team consisted of four people and there was an additional person from the vendor.

These switches are expensive, but they are an excellent buy and definitely have value for the investment.

The switches that we have purchased handle our load pretty well. We do not have a high data plan network.

When our switches age beyond the life cycle then each will be replaced with whatever the current model is in the market at the time. In the future, we would like to integrate Cisco Aironet, although Wi-Fi is a bit down the line for us.

Overall, this is a good product but there is always room for improvement. My main complaint about Cisco is the price aspect.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

On-premises

Flexibility

We standardized on an common command line interface

When Cisco products integrate with a third party module it not easy to renew support on the third party modules software. On hardware replacement the serial numbers don't get added to the support contract and feature codes have to be reinstalled.

10 Years

No

No

No

Customer Service: Very GoodTechnical Support: Very Good

Yes, because of cost. Then the replacements were not reliable enough.

Complex setup. Mostly because of Data,VoIP and Video QOS.

Both. The vendor was very good.

The cost on the entire infrastructure was 1.2 mil. The OPEX is 95k

Yes, tried HP, Dell, 3Com

The network system will need the capacity for future expansion. To go beyond Enterprise Integration, by creating a new infrastructure. Business decisions made today, now become key strategic advantages and capabilities of tomorrow.

We're primarily using the solution for Jim basically the whole IT infrastructure, including the broadcast facility on the management side. It uses Cisco switches, which we spread out with the 9500 Series as sort of the main switches. We also use 93180s to create the backbone or spine of our setup.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ability to manage the switches and the ability to have a certain level of familiarity with setting up and configuring the switches. You can link them together and manage them as one single switch.

The biggest pain point we had was getting the switches delivered. However, that likely was due to COVID and everything else. I don't think it's a Cisco issue. It's just a supplier issue, as they seem to have a hard time getting deliveries in order.

One thing we did have to work around is, on the broadcast side, we're reliant on the PTP protocol, precision time protocol, and the Cisco switches in general, don't support that. Some do, however, the majority of ones we're using did not. We worked around it, however, that would be one area for us that would have been simply solved with more capabilities for PTP on Cisco's end.

I've dealt with the solution for a long time, however, my most recent project has just been over the last six or so months.

The solution has been absolutely fine so far and I have yet to run into any scalability issues just yet. A company should be able to expand if they need to.

We have about 100 people using the product at any given time.

I don't really have direct knowledge of technical support, however, I haven't heard anybody mention anything about reaching out to Cisco. They tend to work through their vendor CDW. I'm sure they have some support agreement with Cisco, although I'm really not the person that would be able to answer that. In general, I can't speak to Cisco's support as I've never had reason to reach out to them.

I wasn't directly involved with the configuration, however, it seemed that the main problem we had was just nailing down the requirements. The way I've worked here is there's a central IT department for the company. They're remotely configuring it. There just was a lot of confusion about specific requirements getting imported. Once those were clarified, then there was no problem setting it up. 

I don't think it's a Cisco issue. It's really an internal management issue in this company. The tools were there and once we nailed down the requirements and we understood them, then it seemed to work just fine. We haven't had any problems since then.

In terms of maintenance, there's a core IT team here of about four people with a manager. Then, there are the corporate people that are shared amongst the whole corporation. At any one time, we probably have one of those persons working on some issue here, on average. Overall, we have six people who can handle maintenance, however, it's not full-time. There are other duties too.

The costs and licensing aren't part of my job and therefore I don't know anything of exact pricing.

We provide engineering and technical support services with a hardware-software. It's my understanding that w don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

My advice to other organizations is to make sure to ensure that whoever the supplier is, they can commit to delivering and making deliveries. In our case, we're waiting on one switch for instance. It's in the mail. It got lost. Now they're promising delivery by tomorrow. I don't see that as a Cisco issue, however, it is a problem when it comes to getting everything implemented. I would have locked in the vendor that could ensure delivery if I knew these issues would arise. 

Overall, I would rate the solution as a solid eight out of ten.

We use it for data centers and for connecting computers in a local network.

I know this solution for many years. I know the GUI and commands, and they are useful for me. I have all the functions that I want.

Cisco can improve its stability for the BGP protocol. It is not stable while recalculating the BGP table.

Its price should also be improved. It is very expensive.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for 20 years.

It is stable in most cases. It is not stable while recalculating the BGP table.

It is scalable. I don't have any problem with its scalability.

We have 500 people in my company. They don't directly work on these devices. I configure these devices, and they connect through these devices.

I have a good opinion about Cisco support. I get local support from a company in Poland. If they are not able to resolve my problem, they send it to Cisco, and then Cisco resolves my problem. I don't have direct contact with Cisco support.

The initial setup is easy for me.

Its price is very high, but it is a good device. Cisco must work on its price. Other solutions provide a better price for similar functionalities.

I would recommend this solution. It is a very good solution.

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

On-premises

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches for LAN networking and connecting our systems.

Cisco Ethernet Switches is stable and robust.

It could be cheaper. It'll also help if it can support more network utilization.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for about two years.

I think Cisco Ethernet Switches are quite stable, and it's pretty robust,

Cisco Ethernet Switches is scalable.

We are satisfied with technical support. 

The initial setup and installation are straightforward.

A consultant implemented it.

It could be cheaper.

I would recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches to potential users.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Ethernet Switches an eight.

On-premises

We primarily use the solution like a normal wired network. We use it in the area before you connect it to outer networks using the firewall. Our inner network is managed by switches. All the wired connections come to those switches. We can do internal networking on the switches such as VLANs and all of those things. We use it for basic switching purpose.

Yes, it has improved.

The solution is easy to use.

The product is quite stable, which is one of its main selling points. The solution can scale.

I don't really have a complaint about the features that the solution has.

It can be a bit expensive, however, it's not as expensive as Meraki switches.

The user interface, the UI, could be better.

Going command mode to make hardcore changes to the config. It's not so futuristic environment for configuration purposes.

While you can scale the solution, it can get expensive.

We've been using the solution for quite a while now. We've used them for at least four or five years at this point.

The solution is extremely stable. We never have issues with it. It doesn't have any underlying issues and is quite reliable.

While the solution can scale, it's a costly endeavor. Scaling definitely will cost an organization more money.

We have about 60 or 70 users of the product within our organization.

While we've occasionally had issues with the solution, we've never actually reached out to technical support. Therefore I can't speak to their responsiveness or knowledgability.

We've always used Ciscos switches of one kind or another. We've never used another brand. We're currently planning to change to Cisco Meraki switches. We haven't yet configured them, however. We're going to use it with a Palo Alto Firewall.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It was extremely straightforward. That said, our setup required a very minimal configuration, and therefore it didn't take up much time. The deployment took maybe half an hour or so.

I handled the implementation myself. I didn't need help from consultants or integrators.

While normal switches are not too expensive, Meraki switches are pricier.

We're just customers and end-users. We don't have any business relationship with Cisco.

It's my understanding that we are not using the latest version of the switches.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten. We've been largely pretty satisfied with the solution.

On-premises