Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for enterprise wireless and hospitality wireless. We're using it to cater to all customer needs.

The cloud manageability feature is valuable. We can access it from anywhere. We don't have to get customers remote connections, we can simply log in using the internet, and they're easy to manage.

It would be better if they enable full integration with Cisco's cloud-based network in the next release. A couple of years back, we did an integration with Cisco Identity Services Engine. There we had some integration issues. Cisco had access in the portfolio, but Cisco Wireless wasn't fully compatible with that integration. If we sell Meraki, we can't promote some other Cisco products because there's a clash. 

I've been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for around four years.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is a stable and reliable solution. We have a dedicated team to perform maintenance.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is scalable. We have some customers that own 100 branches and they're connected. There was no issue regarding scalability.

Cisco's technical support is good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It took us a few weeks to deploy, not much.

We implemented Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as we're an integrator.

The price is on the high side when compared to Aruba. We pay for Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN on a yearly basis.

If you need a simple feature set, you can use Meraki basically without any issues.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight.

We sell and provide technical support for the solution.

We have been using the solution for approximately three years.

I have found it to be stable.

The solution is scalable.

We have 15 employees and we provide support for the solution to our customers.

The price of the product could be cheaper.

I would recommend the solution to others, we have sold it to over 100 customers.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We are a reseller and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is one of the network-related infrastructure devices that we sell. Our customers deploy it where they want to have one single management pane across multiple locations.

The most valuable feature is the ease of deployment.

The price could be slightly lowered to make it more competitive in the market.

We have been reselling this product for between one and two years.

This product is quite stable and we haven't had any issues with our client.

Scalability has not been a problem.

The technical support is good.

I have used Cisco Aironet as well, and I find the Meraki Wireless much easier to deploy.

The initial setup is easier than some other solutions, such as Cisco Aironet. It takes four to five days to complete the deployment.

Our in-house team does the deployment for our customers.

This solution is slightly more expensive than others, such as Ruckus Wi-Fi. There are no costs in addition to the standard licensing fees.

In summary, this is a good product and one that we recommend.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We are a system integrator and this is one of the Wireless solutions that we implement for our customers.

The most valuable feature is cloud management.

The Meraki platform needs better on-premises management options.

I have been working with this specific product for three years, and more generally with Cisco for 20.

This solution is scalable and we haven't had any issues with it. I would say that it is for medium-sized and enterprise-level businesses.

Meraki Wireless LAN is a stable product.

We have dealt with Cisco's technical support in the past and we are satisfied with the service.

We have experience with similar products by other vendors such as Aruba and Arista, and we prefer products by Cisco.

The initial setup is very easy. The length of time required for deployment depends on the situation at the client's site, in terms of readiness. It will also vary depending on the number of switches and routers that are in-place or need to be installed.

Generally, the deployment will not take more than two hours.

This is a product that we recommend over other similar ones by other vendors.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We use this solution to provide wireless connectivity.

The interface makes it easy to manage.

The price of Meraki Wireless should be reduced to make it more affordable.

When we are using SSID roaming, it is not flexible in terms of which AP it connects to. It will not switch to the closet one, but rather, it will maintain a connection with the first one that it had connected to. This has a negative effect on signal quality because as we move around the building and the signal from the original access point gets weaker, it remains connected to it.

We have been using the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than one year.

The stability is good.

Scaling has not been an issue.

We have been in contact with technical support and they have made suggestions to deal with problems that we have had.

The pricing is based on a subscription and is a bit high at the moment.

I am currently searching for solutions that perform similarly to Cisco Meraki, but are most cost-effective. If in the future, the price of Meraki remains as high, then we will be choosing another product.

In summary, I find that this is a really good product and I recommend it. However, improvements with the cost and signal roaming would make it better.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution to understand what is happening in terms of troubleshooting the performance on the network. We have pretty specific user issues. We use it to ensure both our users and devices are secure.

We like the analysis that allows us to see how our cloud applications are performing and we like the way that the solution shows where suites are coming from, including if they are coming from overseas. 

We like the way that we can map the solution against the floor of our building. We are able to see a few things from a topography perspective and can show us if certain aspects are wrong.

The interface is excellent. We've been really happy with it.

We haven't had any issues with the solution. We like the way it works. There isn't anything I can think of that makes me worry that it might be lacking in a certain area.

I've been using the solution for two years now.

The stability is good. We haven't had any crashes. There haven't been bugs or glitches that have interrupted us or our work.

We currently have 60-75 users on the solution. They all use it daily.

For us, the solution seems to be pretty scalable. We haven't had any issues and haven't seen any shortcomings.

I don't recall ever reaching out to technical support. That's not to say we haven't, but I can't remember any specific event or problem where I can discuss a real-life encounter with them. My understanding is that it's good as long as we log a case quickly.

If a case was logged and it's been registered with them, we find the effects in terms or response and resolution are good. We all have different customers with different firewalls and we find technical support in general pretty good. They've got a pretty good presence here in New Zealand, and the support from overseas is pretty good too.

We previously used Ruckus. Meraki is far and away much better for our needs. It was the user interface and its superiority that sold us. It's just far superior and easy to use. The ability to troubleshoot on the graphical interface is just better because the graphical information is so clear.

The initial setup is quite simple. I wouldn't describe it as complex at all.

When we moved to a new building, we were able to have everything up and running in a day or so. Maybe even less than that.

Maintenance is pretty straightforward as well. We just do the updates regularly in order to make sure the server is up to date, as well as any security features.

We're the integrator. We use the solution and also have the capabilities and know-how to bring it all together. We don't need any outside help in order to implement the solution.

I don't have any information about the pricing of the solution. I'm not sure I could estimate the costs on a yearly or monthly basis as I don't deal with finances at our organization. I do believe our company offers very good value for money, although it's my understanding that it's not exactly on the cheapest end of the spectrum.

We have a business relationship with Cisco. We're also a partner.

I'd advise other organizations to think about the solution right through to how they manage and troubleshoot end users. I would recommend that anyone looking at a solution such as this consider that. A lot of people just think about the LAN performance, but I think the ability to understand it and save time by troubleshooting the end-users would be a more important consideration.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I'm an Associate Engineer and as part of my work is that I look after a number of companies where I recommend and install different network equipment. Anything from the SonicWall networks, Fortinet, you name it, depending on what the client requirements are. I would prefer high-end and that could mean Ubiquiti, Mojo, and Cisco. In terms of the version I would choose, it really depends on the client's requirements. We deal with small, medium and enterprise size companies. 

From an organizational perspective, Meraki has made a difference because it's simple to manage with High level of detail and troubleshooting access, when there's a problem. 

The most valuable feature would have to be the cloud management with high level of detail and ability to be able to use all the information to troubleshoot issues remotely before having someone onsite.

The product is fine as it is. Having been in the IT industry for nearly 20 years, there's nothing that jumps out at me. The product is improving all the time. It could be slightly cheaper but it's fine. It's actually a very good product. 

I've been working with Cisco for 10 years. Meraki is more recent, maybe three or four years.

The product is very stable. 

It's not exactly the cheapest solution in terms of scalability, but it's very good. A lot of my clients have to look at other alternatives because of the cost and it's likely that in the end, they take Mojo even though I don't like that product as much. If I were going to choose an alternative to Cisco it would be Ubiquiti but it all comes down to cost.

Cisco provide good support and there have been times when we've needed it. 

We can deploy on-premises or on the cloud, but it's usually cloud. The amount of time it takes to deploy is really dependent on the client and the size of the company. 

I would suggest that sometimes it might be better to spend more money on better equipment that will perform a lot better, so if you have the funds go for it, but if not, then you have to work within your budget. 

I would rate this product a seven out of 10. 

This is a cloud-based solution that is easily managed. You can manage the visibility and the cloud controller.  

It's a cloud solution that we can access from anywhere, on a mobile phone or any device. We can connect to it, manage it, and we can configure it. It's simple, really easy.

The stability of this solution is not good. It needs improvement.

Operation-wise this solution has some problems and the functionality is not very good.

In the next release, I would like to see a third-party high tech center to connect multiple users to a particular network.

This solution is not stable.

This solution is still evolving and sometimes the authentication stops working and the client is not able to browse anything even though it is connected. It's quite an unstable solution. 

This solution is scalable. It's good and we have no issues.

Cisco's technical support is very good and better than other vendors.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.