Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

Our use case is remote clinics. We have over 40 remote clinics, and we even use it in our mobile vans or buses for providing free medical to the homeless and those in need. 

We have a hybrid type infrastructure. We have Cisco as well as Aruba, but from the wireless perspective, it is all Aruba due to security and costs. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is deployed in a data center. We have our own infrastructure because of HIPAA compliance and other regulations. When going into the cloud, you don't know who is managing and whether they properly bedded in terms of sensitive, classified, and not classified information or data.

I also use it in my home. I have a cloud in my garage. I have converged network storage and everything else in my garage. My garage is a data center, and I consider it a cloud. I am using the latest version of this solution.

The ability to manage it remotely is the most valuable. If it has an internet connection, you can get to it. It is a great product for remote clinics. We kind of thought about doing this kind of standalone technology. 

Meraki is easy to manage. From a management perspective, it is the easiest to use, especially in the cloud. I like Meraki. I even have it in my home.

I would like to see more cybersecurity. I would like the ability to go in and enhance security. Because WPA2 is becoming obsolete, many devices are now WPA3, but the challenge is that a lot of devices are not yet there. 

I would like to be able to go in and do monitoring, similar to ASPM. ASPM has the ability to monitor who's joining and who's active. It supports two-step monitoring. The stability of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN can also be improved.

I have been using this solution since it came out. 

Its stability could be improved.

It has scalability. It can be scaled depending on your business needs.

Cisco support is amazing. You get what you pay for. I did a network for the border patrol, and we used Cisco and another product called Antera. From the Cisco perspective, we were able to resolve any issues relating to ring networks, but for Antera, we had to rely on somebody from Taiwan, which was a challenge.

Its initial setup is straightforward. We do wireless on all the access points.

We do a three-year or five-year license and support. Its price could be better, but overall, we get competitive prices.

A lot of times, Cisco puts itself out of range, especially with Meraki. I've dealt with a lot of business development from Cisco, and they have always been accommodating, especially in dealing with hospitals or government. There is also a right time to buy it. July is when they are eager to sell a lot of things because that is the end of their calendar year.

I would recommend this solution if it is right for your environment. I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten. It is great, but it has room for improvement.

Cisco uses DNS for registration and similar functions, just like other manufacturers. The three-day UC protocol chipset from Cisco doesn't offer much differentiation. In contrast, other solutions provide more detailed graphical interfaces and attractive features in Policy Manager. For example, combining Aruba with ClearPass offers better positioning due to NAC and other functionalities. 

The multi-tenant solution needs improvement, especially in terms of speed. While it works, the graphics and call management could be better; sometimes, significant enhancements are needed.

When it comes to cloud solutions, Cisco has an edge over Aruba. Cisco’s LAN solutions benefit from open APIs, whereas Aruba’s offerings are more closed off. Cisco allows for more concurrent sessions and better bandwidth efficiency. 

They need to develop a cybersecurity solution beyond virtual machines and concurrent sessions. The pricing model should reflect a more comprehensive approach. It’s important to consider different factors and not rely on traditional metrics. 

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for five years.

Cisco provides 24/7 support, similar to Aruba. However, support is not up to par if you're referring to Stream. While you might encounter junior-level support at times, the overall service is reliable and aimed at addressing issues effectively.

Positive

It's about the applications and the ability to control radio settings and monitor signal quality. The radio performance may not be the strongest when working with Cisco Meraki in telephony and complex IP environments. In my experience, Ruckus is the best in radio signaling, followed by Aruba and Cisco.

Aruba and Cisco offer similar levels of encryption protection. Regarding cybersecurity, Aruba tends to outperform Cisco, particularly in NAC solutions. Aruba provides a more effective policy management solution than Cisco, making its policy manager superior.

The initial setup can be complex because it involves a CA provided by Aruba and integrated with Aruba ClearPass. With this CA, you can generate certificates, which are then downloaded to devices and users. This approach differs from others in its setup and management processes.

Cisco had a significant share of the market, but it's lost some of it. It initially led in LAN, but now it faces strong competition. Fortinet has become a major competitor in Spain, particularly in terms of pricing, making it attractive across various industries.

Cisco is a bit pricey and has lost ground in LAN applications and policy management. When combining Cisco with Forescout and Aruba, Forescout is superior to Aruba and Cisco in terms of NAC, control, and office environments. However, Aruba performs better than Cisco in control and office settings. Cisco's use of RADIUS can be quite complex to maintain and install.

If customers have strong radio performance and robust network access control, Cisco is a strong choice for connectivity and straightforward deployment. However, if a customer wants a comprehensive solution that includes security, scalability, and a user-friendly interface, they should consider competitors who offer a more global solution.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

We use it for our office's wireless solution, allowing employees to connect to Wi-Fi within the office environment.

The most valuable features include key elements like creating SSIDs, networking configurations, and the ability to manage all devices through a single console.

The pricing structure could be improved.

We have been using it for approximately two years.

If my internet connection experiences disruptions, the Meraki registration on the internet goes offline, causing the device to also go offline. I would rate the stability nine out of ten.

It's highly scalable, receiving a perfect rating of ten out of ten. It is extensively used by over ten thousand users.

The technical support is prompt, knowledgeable, and customer-friendly.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment is quick and straightforward, requiring minimal time and effort. We simply need to configure the IP and default gateway. The implementation strategy depends on our business needs and the modifications or deployments we undertake, whether it's for production or office use. 
Seven individuals are responsible for managing all the information.

The license is based on an annual subscription. It is a relatively expensive solution compared to traditional network alternatives.

Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

Our basic feature here is that we're in the education field.

I used to be a Cisco controller-based program, and 

This product has absolutely improved the way our organization functions.

It's much faster and it's more balanced. It gives me the ability to balance the network a little bit better from a 2.4 interface, as far as channelization is concerned. Then, with AC coming out with the five gigahertz, getting much more stable, it's allowed a lot of us to switch over to that. However, it is important that you still have the support for 2.4 because it's out there.

What I like best about Meraki is that I can change it from anywhere. I'm really the only person here that understands the concepts, which means that if I'm not on campus, resolving the problem is something that I can do online.

We also have a resident program here as well. So, if something's not right with the resident or they have an issue with their internet over there, I can flip to make it go over to a different internet circuit pretty quickly without ever coming onto campus.

Initially, I liked some of the filtering features, but that's one of the components that we ran into problems with. We don't use it as much anymore. This is one of the things that I'm trying to find out if Aruba does better.

For example, I like all of my iOS devices to go on one network so that if they try to do iOS updates, we have an Apple server online so that they can just pull the iOS updates from it instead of having them on other parts of the network. Also, we're a one-to-one school where we give laptops out, and I'd like to be able to block the old laptops from being able to access the network. That means that the students are forced to use their new laptop, as opposed to an older one.

It would be really helpful if there were a way that the access point could determine whether the client has an AC radio and if so, force it to try and connect to there first. As it is now, it lets the client determine how it wants to connect. This is the case with wireless in general, but it would be nice to have this option.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for approximately six years.

The only time we've had any issue at all is when the firmware upgrades don't automatically apply. You can set them to automatically apply, but you have to be really careful in a school setting, because you can't just say, "Oh yeah, I want to reboot this building." It would mean that the entire building will go down. This means that you have to schedule those a little bit differently. I always do it manually instead of automatically.

I wish it would let us do one access point at a time because then I could literally do a building. It doesn't let you do one at a time. It does let you schedule them as a network but doesn't let you pick a specific access point for a specific time.

This is a product that scales pretty easily. We have about 1,200 people using it.

We have students and teachers and parents, and then, of course, we have staff members in general, and lots of different devices. One of the big things that I will challenge people at, and I don't think a lot of people realize this, but the challenge of some school networks is, especially for us, I'll use a final time, for example, is all of a sudden you have to have 850 to 900 people on the network at one time.

The exam starts now and all 850 students have to get on the network now. You don't see that any other school at that point in time. Kids come on, they join whenever, they've already got it on. You don't see that, but in those classes when they have to start exams, everybody has to hit that network and load a page now. Your network has to be able to be designed to handle that.

This is one of the reasons we've had to balance the wireless to make sure that we've been able to get good successful connections throughout the entire campus inside of every classroom. That way, no access points overloaded or the bandwidth is not overloaded. If you lose one in the middle, it's enough that it can withstand the fail over of another classroom in the middle of that type of exam.

It is this concept and design that has allowed us to sustain this system for more than five years without a problem.

The technical support is pretty good the team is very knowledgeable. Normally it takes once or twice to get through to them or get to the right level, but other than that, it's really good. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

We originally had Cisco and it was really costly. They eventually grew out of our price range in terms of the price of their equipment.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

We evaluated Aruba but at the time, I didn't feel that they were quite there. They had just introduced some of the web-related products, and Meraki was already seasoned.

We are currently looking at other products, including those from Aruba and Cisco. This is because our licensing is about to expire and it's time to upgrade the access points in some of our buildings. 

My advice for anybody who is considering this product is that you have to evaluate what your overall goal is. If you have a team that's going to monitor your network, that's not going to be there, especially if they're offsite, then you're going to have to do a web-based solution because that's the easiest way that they can help maintain it, versus an on-premise solution.

That narrows you down to a couple of different entities. Then, you just have to look at your features and what you like, from security measures to applications to structure. You have to find what fits the best.

I would definitely do an evaluation with any of them to make sure that they all fit within your confines.

In summary, this is a good product but there is always room for improvement.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this product for the branch network connecting with the core application in the data centers of our main customers. 

We provide a Wi-Fi, secured internet connection for the customer branch.

This is an entry point to excel in other value-added services. 

Connectivity is the base of our internet provider service.

The most valuable feature is the technology of the security that is offered.

The connection to the internet via Wi-Fi, for external people who frequent the customer branch, needs improvement.

In the next release, I would like to see the central control plane have the flexibility to control and distribute policies to all LAN networks, balance the traffic, and the performance based on application monitoring.

I have been using this solution for approximately three or four months.

It's a stable solution.

This is not an area that I have explored as I am not a project specialist, but we would like to increase our usage.

We have approximately 300 users.

Technical support is good, but not easy to access and the technology is not open. It is very proprietary.

We have to have a variety of solution vendors in our portfolio. Currently, we have Aruba, Huawei, and Fortinet.

We will be increasing our vendors to include others to enlarge our portfolio.

Aruba is better for radio performance coverage, and it's easier. Meraki is more secure.

The initial setup is quite complex.

We have a team of six or seven internal members, plus the system integrator to maintain this solution.

We used a systems integrator selected by Meraki.

This solution is quite costly and there are costs in addition to the licensing fees.

Depending on the preference of the customer, we have some monthly or yearly licenses.

This is a product I can recommend to others.

I would rate this solution a six out of ten.

Our primary use case for the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solution is providing Internet access, particularly for guests and remote environments. It enables us to implement controls such as a hospitality landing page for guest authentication, enhancing security and user experience.

The product's coverage area could be expanded. It would help ensure better connectivity.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for three months.

I rate the platform's stability seven out of ten. Sometimes, there might be network outages or power shortages. The SSID remains safe; however, you may need to switch off your Wi-Fi and switch it back on the network to resolve connectivity issues.

The scalability is quite satisfactory. I rate it around seven or eight, but not a perfect ten. I have deployed it for over 150 users.

The technical support services are good.

Positive

The product is easy to deploy. It took a few minutes to complete.

The platform is highly priced. We have purchased its five-year license.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is quite helpful in supporting remote work environments. It's easy to manage and provides a clear network view, allowing efficient navigation down to the network details.

The most useful feature is the ability to determine and control traffic flow. Additionally, the reporting features are valuable. Since I manage the system through the cloud setup, the cloud management feature is quite easy to use. It has a network efficiency of 60%. The platform is stable and easy to deploy.

I rate it an eight out of ten.

The majority of our Meraki sales focus on advising and implementing robust networks. In some instances, we complement these setups by incorporating Meraki switches into the infrastructure.

It is highly effective and user-friendly. The primary value lies in the ease of configuration; these products seamlessly integrate, and work well together. Deployment is straightforward and hassle-free.

It is not a budget-friendly solution. If, for instance, you invest in Meraki access points with five-year licensing keys, a significant downside is that once that licensing period expires, the devices cease to function unless you either renew the licenses or replace the hardware.

We have been working with it for approximately ten years.

It consistently maintains stability, ensuring a reliable and robust performance for our network infrastructure. I would rate it nine out of ten.

It offers excellent scalability, making it well-suited for medium-sized businesses like ours, with approximately ten clients. I would rate it nine out of ten.

I would rate its customer service and support nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was straightforward. I would rate it nine out of ten.

The deployment time varies, contingent on factors such as network size and complexity. Generally, assuming the access points are already in place, you can deploy around five access points in a couple of hours. This estimate considers a straightforward setup where the cabling is pre-installed, and the configuration process involves mounting the devices. However, the actual time may extend to three hours or more for more intricate networks with additional considerations like VLANs and user policies. Typically, we begin by ensuring the client has network points in the desired locations for the access devices, a responsibility that lies with them. We then proceed to configure the devices before they are sent to the site. An engineer is dispatched to install the access points, conduct network testing, and finalize the setup. To assess network coverage, our engineers employ software during on-site walks. The process involves creating a heat map, which is initially loaded onto the site to plan the optimal placement of access points. We share this anticipated coverage model with the client, keeping them informed about the expected outcomes. While we can't guarantee absolute accuracy due to factors like wall construction details, we work closely with the client to align their expectations. Following the installation, we use additional software tools to verify the actual coverage and performance, ensuring the client has a clear understanding of their investment.

The pricing is on the higher side. I would rate it eight out of ten. While it may be relatively expensive, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN justifies its cost with its high-quality features and performance.

My advice is to thoroughly assess and plan the placement of access points in your network. Planning is the key. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

The solution was deployed in five locations in The Netherlands. We are in K-12 education. Around 2000 students and 500 staff have used Meraki WiFi for the past seven years. 

Younger students have Apple iPads and older students use Microsoft Surface. Staff have a mixture of Dell laptops and Microsoft Surfaces, and can move between sites using the same SSID on all sites. 

Infrastructure is mostly Cisco Catalyst switches L2 and L3, with Sophos firewalls. The use of mobile devices is mainly internet browsing, with some local access to internal database applications.

Cisco Meraki is easy to set up and maintain, yet has issues with firmware updates breaking functions, and not being fixed for months - in one case more than one year. 

Roaming seems to be a function they break regularly with their updates, and then cannot find a solution for. They ask us to wait 18 months for a fix, whilst telling us to upgrade to fix other issues, and not fixing the roaming issue. 

If you don’t discover the problem within two weeks, they refuse to downgrade you to a working firmware version, leaving you with a non-working one. 

And putting the emphasis on you to prove you have a problem. We are a Microsoft school and don’t have Apple, and yet they asked us to find a personal Apple device to install packet capture software on, so they can troubleshoot their issues. It took more than a month to get them to admit there was a problem with their firmware and roll it back to a working version. All the time, students were having problems with roaming.

Licensing is obviously an issue with these devices. You need to buy a license to keep it working. If the license runs out you have no WiFi anymore.

For the last issue I reported, the response from the helpdesk was ‘use a less complex password’. Our password was ‘password’.

On the positive side, they will replace any broken hardware without question.

After five years we decided to replace our old Meraki APs, and Cisco gave a quote for 80 thousand euros, plus they wanted us to relocate every access point to a different position in the building. Another company gave us a quote for a quarter to this price, with no licenses needed and access points in every classroom. Needless to say, we ditched Meraki.

It is very handy to have a support number to call. They will replace the hardware the next day if you prove it is broken.

The dashboard has a lot of functions and is fast, and you can configure everything you need from the dashboard.

The app is handy - when it works and you can log in.

Firewall and traffic shaping are very useful. Also, application blocking is handy.

You can see exactly which clients are connected to which device and trace traffic going to that device.

Maps and floor plans are very useful to see where a client is connected.

The licensing model is a terrible idea. Don’t buy a license for seven years, you will be stuck with old hardware that doesn’t work properly anymore, and can’t be replaced and you are expected to pay yourself to replace in order to fix their issues. If they can't fix the issues anymore in 7-year-old hardware they should replace the hardware at their expense, however, all they say is you have to buy new hardware. A maximum of a five-year license is my recommendation. WiFi technology moves fast and seven-year-old hardware is no longer workable.

The limit of two weeks on rolling back a firmware update is ridiculous. If you report a problem that affects a whole location they should let you roll back the firmware after any amount of time, not limited to two weeks. Then you have to spend a month every day on the phone trying to persuade them that you have a serious issue with their firmware.

I've used the solution for seven years.

The stability is fine until you upgrade firmware and then discover something doesn't work. 

The solution is good and easy to scale if you keep the same settings everywhere.

The helpdesk is always available to help you, but their help is very limited sometimes. For example, if you have gone over the 2 weeks deadline with downgrades, they can refuse to downgrade you until you prove to them that your new firmware isn't working properly. So don't expect to have working WiFi for a few weeks, whilst you try and prove to the helpdesk you have a problem. Then after a month they finally admit there is an issue, and agree to downgrade you, and all the problems magically go away. Until the next time, you upgrade.

Neutral

We used Cisco's traditional WiFi with hardware controllers on all sites - AIR-CAP and AIR-LAP

We switched due to the fact that the cloud dashboard to manage all sites seemed like a great idea, no more controllers on-site to maintain, and support was built in to the licensing.

The setup was done by a reseller, who said 'this is a standard install, nothing special' until we had 1,000 students all come into the school after the holiday and discovered it didn't work properly. 

Then when talking with Meraki, we discovered the reseller had set it up with default settings, hadn't accounted for high density, and didn't do the channel planning properly. After several re-visits, they did a channel plan and set it up manually, which did help.

Through a reseller. Level of expertise = nil. Meraki had to tell them how to setup the correct channels.

High capital expenditure and licensing costs make it an expensive option compared to other vendors in the market.

The cost of the hardware and licensing is extreme compared to other vendors. The Meraki model would be great for small/medium businesses with many locations to manage in one dashboard. However, it's not good for education, the roaming often doesn't work and the rollback is difficult, especially if Meraki decide they are not going to help you, and not fix their issues for 18 months.

We might have looked at Ruckus and Aruba, however, Meraki seemed like the best option for us. It was also recommended by Oxford University at an education event.

Make sure it's the right solution for your business. Don't buy a seven-year license as seven years is too long in the WiFi space. 

Get a good reseller who will give you good support, not just say "contact Meraki" every time you have a problem.

We are transitioning away from Meraki to another vendor, with four sites down and one to go. There are no regrets so far.

EDIT: 7 years later, our new wifi vendor so much better. Cheaper, stable and much easier to manage.