Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

The primary use case is for LAN networking.

This solution is also used for internet routing in small businesses.

The deployment model we used was on-premises.

Lower the pricing to compete with Aruba and HPE.

If they could provide a management solution for all systems then it would be an improvement. They have a product, but it's a license, and I have to pay for it. 

It is difficult to manage one hundred switches in many areas, without having a managing board.

I would like a management product to manage both the small business and the Catalyst.

In my business, I have all of these products and I have to configure them one by one, so the troubleshooting and the monitoring of each can be challenging.

Also with a managing board, it would improve the scalability as it would be easier to handle the traffic and monitoring several users.

This may be something that they are already working on, but it would be an improvement if they could add a layer of security to layer two and layer three to protect the server and to protect the data.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable. If I want to add switches to the existing one, I can easily do it. 

The technical support is good and they respond quickly. I haven't had any problems.

The initial setup is not difficult, it's easy.

The pricing is reasonable, and for small business it is acceptable.

Aruba and HPE are competitors that have a lower price than Cisco.

I would rate this solution a nine out ten.

The solution is basically issue-free. They are constantly upgrading their technology.

It's an easy solution to set up. 

Technical support is helpful and responsive. 

It's a stable product. 

The user interface could be improved. 

The licensing is too expensive. It's one of the main reasons customers leave Cisco. 

I've been working with Cisco products for more than ten years. I've used the product for a very long time. 

The stability has been very good. It's quite reliable. There are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

It's a scalable product. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so. It's no problem. 

We've used it in a large company and had no issues. 

Technical support is the best. Compared to other solutions, like Aruba, Cisco is top-notch. 

Typically, the agents are good and helpful. Sometimes we may run into issues, however, 90% of the time, they are great. 

Positive

The solution is easy to implement. The process is not overly complex. Technically speaking, it's pretty simple. 

The solution is not cheap. Cisco is quite pricey.

We're customers and end-users. 

I'd advise users to try out the product. I've been happy with its capabilities. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution in the access layer for connecting EP-phone, PC, and access points. We use Cisco, like 3850, for the aggregation layer, and we use 6500 catalyst switches for the core layer.

They have very good throughput and backup for their energy. We find, stock-wise and energy-wise, it's easy to use with the CLA command.  

I can create a lot of interfaces, or SDI interfaces for VLAN and SNMP. I can show it with my SNMP platform. I can gain much access to them. They are really, really, good switches.

The solution is stable.

The scalability has been great.

We find the setup process to be simple. 

Technical support has always been helpful.

Stock-wise, the solution can improve.

The patching and updating could be better.

We'd like the pricing to be lowered. 

The stability is quite good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The scalability of the product is great, If a company needs to expand, it can. There is a lot of stacking and cascading that can happen.

Technical support from Cisco has been great. They are helpful and responsive. 

We primarily use Cisco in our company.

It's a very easy to deploy product. It's just a question of buying the cable for stacking and getting it done.

The pricing of the solution is pretty high.

Compared with other switches, such as Huawei or HPE, it's very, very expensive. ON top of that, the campus network, it's not an area that has a high budget. We have to have work towards minimizing this price.

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

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. It's great for small to large enterprises. Just the number of ports that we can create makes a difference. We can use a lot of switches with 48 ports. In the smaller cases, we can still use 12 ports. 

The features that I have found most valuable with Cisco switches are that once you get your configuration you can rest assured that it will work. The OS is not going to be failing intermittently or anything like that. Once you get your configuration end-goal right, the firmware and the OS are usually stable enough to work a long time without support. Support is only needed once in a while. My experience is that the Cisco switches are usually rocket.

In terms of what could be improved, there is the bulk issue that is sometimes experienced with the Cisco products we've used. I don't know how it could be possible to be done, but it would be very good if there was an automated patching system. It would be a very big and difficult one, because some of these routers or switches or products are not even within an internet environment. This is especially limited with the switches. Routers can be connected to the internet and switches might not even have internet access and might just be for the local area network. If it has an internet connection, that would be great and if it has an automated parking code inside of the POE this would help them to patch without the user's input.

In the next release, I would like to see bulk fixing. That is basically what I do now. If we could have an automated patch for Cisco to just be standard for patching switches or routers or firewalls by default without the input of anyone adjusting, that would be great.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches since 2009, so probably for 13 years now.

In terms of scalability, normally you have a 24 port switch or a 48 port switch, which are fixed to scalability. So you can't really go beyond what has been provided. If it's a 24 switch, it's 24 users, if it's 48 it's 48, except if you're using the switch as an extender for a wireless device. That is a different conversation, but if you're using it in a LAN environment and for a connected, wired connection, then you can't scale.

But you can connect multiple switches to themselves and stack them and make it one switch depending on your design.

The setup is pretty easy. It's usually easy to configure, especially when you are using it for basic switching. It is usually easy to configure the VLAN, the PTPs and all of that.  The major work lies with your architecture and your design and how you want to use the solution, because once you get the architecture right, then your configurations and all will be very simple. But if you don't, you might have to do a lot of work when it comes to configuring.

A lot depends on how you configure it from the beginning. It's going to influence how it's going to work the rest of the time.

When it comes to switches and routers, I will always prefer Cisco over any other.

On a scale of one to ten, I'll give Cisco Ethernet Switches a seven because switch-wise, I think Juniper switches are also very good in performance. Especially the high end switches.

We have a local network and we have four Cisco Ethernet Switches that have 48 ports.

The management of the solution could improve.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are stable.

The solution is scalable.

Cisco technical support is good. We have a better experience because we have local support when we have some technical problems. The team support is very good.

The setup of the solution is easy.

The price of Cisco Ethernet Switches here in India is too high. There are other cheaper solutions available.

Our management has decided we should look into other solutions, and we are currently evaluating Juniper switches. We are checking the performance of the solution.

Cisco products are good, but nowadays technology is changing, some other products are available in the market. We are checking some different products available. I'll see how the performance is and how it works on the network.

I rate Cisco Ethernet Switches a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in our data center or campus connectivity. We're using bridges to connect end-user devices and terminals.

The solution comes from a solid company that always offers good quality products. It's a real market leader in this area and can provide end-to-end solutions.  

The initial setup is straightforward. It's not too hard.

The product offers very good customer support. It's likely the best in the industry.

There is very good distribution around the globe. 

The products are very reliable.

A single switch is very easy to manage.

Cisco doesn't do everything 100% perfect. There are competitors that have developed simpler and cheaper options, for example. The solution really should offer better pricing. It would help them stay competitive.

The product is a bit difficult to manage as there's a different management system now.

The network management system could be improved. 

I've worked with the solution for 25 years now. I've used it for decades. I have a wealth of experience with this product.

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. The performance is good.

The product scales quite well. It works for any size organization. A company can also expand it out if they need to.

We have around 2,500 customers and half of them use Cisco.

Technical support is excellent. It's the best in the industry.

As an implementor, I've worked with a variety of solutions, including Aruba, Mellanox, Juniper, Ruckus, and more. I've worked with most of the vendors in the industry.

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

The deployment depends. It can take from a couple of minutes to a couple of months. It depends on the project and it depends on the size of the network.

How many people you need for the deployment depends on the size of the job. Some companies have their own on-site engineers.

The solution does not come cheap. It's quite pricey.

You do need a license in order to use the solution.

I work with the latest version of the solution. I'm an implementor and my company is a Cisco Gold partner.

I would recommend the solution to others. I would rate the solution at an eight out of ten.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in our data center.

The most valuable feature is that we create a network as a villain. For some time, we use a port channel and sometimes, the Spanning Tree Protocol for requests. We search for the user's Cisco Internet switches for small packets.

The technical support has room for improvement.

I have been using the solution for six years.

The Cisco Ethernet Switches are very stable and a leader in the market.

The solution is scalable and we have the ability to upgrade our appliances without impacting our services.

The Cisco technical support is good but when compared to other products such as McAfee and Palo Alto they have room for improvement.

For Cisco Catalyst switches, the initial setup was usually automated for large-scale deployments such as Azure, which worked well. However, for newer technologies such as Cisco ACI, the initial setup can be challenging. Once the primary phase is completed, however, the efficiency of the operation requires less support.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We have them set up for customers, including SMB, Kindergarten through grade 12 schools, higher education organizations, and some enterprises. It's pretty much been used for everything except the federal government.

The Cisco software does everything under one umbrella better than the competition. HP kind of has the capability. I'm not sure if they still have it, however, they used to license Cisco's iOS software for their own switches, which were decent switches as well. Now, there's Aruba, however, they've been through a bunch of different changes over the years. ThreeCom was part of HP for a while. In any case, Cisco offers sort of a one-stop-shop of options.

It's all-encompassing and can help you in all these different areas. If people realize that they want something that's going to work, that's pretty foolproof, then Cisco's always worth the investment.

The initial setup has gotten easier over the years.

The stability is excellent.

The solution is very scalable.

Technical support is quite helpful and responsive. 

The thing that people usually complain about is that they're a little bit more expensive than other options. That said, you get what you pay for and it's such a good solution.

You do have to buy into the Cisco architecture to be able to use them.

You have to make sure you size appropriately at the outset. They're for the smaller markets usually, and you just want to make sure you don't purchase something under what you might grow to. Users should try to think a little bit bigger than what they want just so that they can have extra ports if they need them, instead of having to buy another one quicker than expected.

Our company has worked with Cisco probably for more than 20 years. The company is 31 years old, and we've actually always worked with Cisco Switches since the beginning. We have the same master engineer that has been with us for probably 28 of the 30 years. He's always been working with that.

The solution is very stable. That's one of the main benefits of it. It's super stable, and it's been proven for years.

They've got many solutions for small companies, which we work with, and some of our biggest customers, and even multinationals can use Cisco probably better than anybody else. That's why the fact that international community likes it so much. They can use it anywhere in the world in companies of any size. It scales very well.

Technical support is usually very good. You're paying for the best, so the tech support is really good as well. We are quite satisfied with the level of service provided. 

We also have experience with solutions such as Juniper, Aruba, and Ruckus. 

If the people want to save some money, they'll go with a Ruckus switch or something else as it's less expensive. With Cisco, it has you covered, however, it's a little bit more expensive, and if you don't like the fact that it's got the closed infrastructure, it's a closed architecture, you're not going to mix and match it with switches from other companies.

In terms of the initial setup, I'm never really involved in it. It's our engineers that do that. It's a definite effort to get everything set up and working correctly. It's not just out of the box, however, these days they've all gotten so much better. The Cisco products of today would be much easier to put together than the ones in the past.

The pricing is high. It's expensive, however, you get what you pay for and it is an excellent solution.

I would advise new users to work with a reseller that has a good history of working with Cisco and that can do a good game plan upfront with what your actual long-term goals and needs will be.

I'd rate the solution at an eight out of ten. The product is excellent, however, nothing is perfect, which is why I haven't rated it at a perfect ten. There are always ways to improve.