Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We installed approximately 20 Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN in our headquarters and we have a remote site, a satellite office, which has about seven more installed.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is an on-premise solution, but it uses the Meraki cloud portal. We have to register the WAP with the cloud.

In our Satellite office, we have approximately 30 users and guests. We have a guest network that runs through the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and a corporate network that runs through it. Our headquarters network hasn't been used as much, everybody's working remotely over the last year and a half because of COVID. Prior to the pandemic, we would have up to 300 people in the headquarters and guests.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has helped our organization because we are able to be connected to the network while moving around. For example, I am able to take a presentation from one conference room and walk across the building and present it in another conference room without losing connection. This is pretty good for us.

The most valuable features in Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN are that we were able to see all the registered users for each particular WAP, which is a big help. The roaming allows us to have continuous wireless throughout the building. The signal can carry over from one WAP to another. Which is probably the most important feature.

We're are not fully utilizing the features of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN to know a more in-depth analysis of what areas need to be improved. However, the security could improve. It would be a benefit to be able to lock out particular clients that are trying to connect from outside the building.

In an upcoming release, it would be a benefit to have a security dashboard that could show additional information. In addition to our Meraki solution, we have a Cisco product called ISE, Identification Security Engine, and we can detect non-compliant or non-corporate addresses from our network. Instead of using a second product, the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN should be able to isolate the non-specified MAC addresses into the network.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for approximately three and a half years.

The stability of the network is very good. I think we had oversaturated our HQ environment, where we had too many devices in a particular location. We actually had to change some of our configurations because it was causing some connectivity competition between WAPs trying to connect. We had to remove a WAP to allow better connectivity.  

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is scalable. If we needed to expand, it's easy to add another WAP for a new location.

As we come back into the office, in January, we'll start out with approximately 100 users. We're going into a hybrid mode and we will not have as many users as we did, prior to COVID. We had upwards of 300 people connecting and that's mostly everybody with their mobiles or laptops that come into the office. At our highest, it is approximately 300 users but starting in January, we'll probably have approximately 100 to 200.

We do not have plans to expand our usage at this time. However, if we open up a new office then we will most likely expand usage.

We have contacted Cisco's technical support a couple of times and they're very responsive. I would give them a thumbs up.

We used the previous version of Meraki at our old headquarters. The only reason we switched was that we wanted a newer product in a new office. In terms of our office move, we decided to buy all new equipment and that's the only reason we switched.

The installation is straightforward. The wireless portion of the installation took approximately one week. This included  mounting and bringing activating the network.

We used a consulting group for the completion of our network completion in our building. I followed along with them, it wasn't too complex. My experience with the constant was very good.

We have three system administrators, one being myself, and my two coworkers. We're all capable of managing the Meraki environment.

We are on a SmartNet contract. All of our Cisco products are licensed under one contract. I do not think there are any additional costs.

We did not evaluate any other options when we switched over to the newer version of  Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

My advice to other thinking about implementing this solution is to look at other products that are out there. I don't want to say stuck, but we are using all-Cisco products at the time and there are probably products that may be less expensive that could do the same job. We're in contract with Cisco and this is why we went with the newer version of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN when we needed a new solution. If anyone was looking for a wireless solution, look at different manufacturers.

I never rate anything at 10 because there's always room for improvement.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight out of ten.

We use it for our IoT devices in the office. It is currently our wireless solution for all devices that require wireless connectivity, for example, our IoT devices and our user's laptops and phones.

Within our organization, there are roughly 400 to 500 users, using this solution. Mostly
developers, editors, finance — everybody uses it.

Soon, we're making the switch to Aruba wireless.

Because it's so easy for the common person to use, It has become less desirable for people who know the technology. The funny thing is that Meraki does have the ability to allow you to do that because you're talking about stuff that is controller-based. 

That is very good for small to medium-sized businesses with somebody who doesn't have that kind of skill-set to troubleshoot their environment; however, it's frustrating for somebody that wants to actually configure certain things. You can't do it because there's no way that you can get into that without asking them for permission.

The fact that it's cloud-based is valuable because you don't have to have an actual physical controller in your location. That cuts down on space that you need, the redundancy, the power that you consume, how much it takes to cool down your server room, etc.

Because it's user-friendly, you can hand off some of the easier troubleshooting tasks to people that are not necessarily wireless engineers. You can hand it off to a desktop team, so that's helpful.

With other solutions, you have to configure the right guardrails to keep people from messing things up, but Meraki already has those guardrails in place. This is very frustrating for a competent engineer because then he doesn't have the ability to customize it the way he wants — it's a double-edged sword.

The advanced configuration makes it so that any user can enable some of these features without having to ask them for help. It's designed like this because their business model targets people with mid-range expertise.

I think Meraki's doing fine, but I had to leave them because I came from using Cisco before they bought Meraki — which gives you so many options that you can expand upon that it's absolutely mind-numbing. 

As you learn, you miss some of those features when you switch to something else. I did enjoy using Meraki and I would use it again, but I wouldn't be using it for a large office because they don't have the kind of manpower to properly administrate it.

If there are advanced features that you can have enabled, they should allow users access to that in an easier manner. 

I have been using this solution for roughly four years.

I don't remember any outages that were caused by a loss of connection to the Meraki cloud controller. They can operate independently, which is good — they were stable. It has not been a chore or a very hard thing to work through. I really don't have any problems with the stability of the product. It's a good product, it's just not great for everybody.

Because it is cloud-based, you don't have to worry about it. Once you deploy it, it's very easy. You could actually ship one to a remote office, have them plug it in and once it phones home, you register it, and then you can configure it. So in that regard, it's very easy to set up a remote office. It's very good that way.

Their technical support is pretty good. Overall, I would give their support a rating of 8 out of ten.

They should expand their knowledge base online. I think a lot of problems could easily be solved if they had a better knowledge base.

We were using a WLC wireless LAN controller. We stopped using that solution because we had just been purchased by another company that was using Meraki, so we just sort of moved it over against my wishes. 

The initial setup was very straightforward. Our network engineer had it deployed in roughly one week.

We deployed it ourselves. We read about it and then we implemented it. As I said, it's not very hard.

Utilize the packet capture — I found that very helpful. Troubleshooting is one of the features that I found really helpful — day by day, trying to figure out what's going on. I think that people that are going to purchase it are looking for something really simple and something that works.

If I had to summarize Meraki, the biggest lesson that I learned while using it would be: simplicity has its costs.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of eight.

It's a very good solution for small to medium-sized businesses that don't have the technical know-how to look for an enterprise-wide wireless solution. It's a great product for sub- enterprise solutions. It's also really good for hospitals and schools because of the easy deployment.

I use the product and I think that for what they're trying to achieve, there's nothing better.

Even though I'm moving to Aruba, I've seen and felt their wireless cloud-based controller system. I think that might be a little complicated for the average person. 

To take it to a rating of ten, there should be some more advanced features. I know that they have more stuff. You buy into the Meraki way, so to speak. You buy their switches, you buy their access points, everything starts to work a little bit better together; I never did that. I think that some of the stuff that I've even thought was making them better, they probably have already done. It's just that it wasn't for me. They should allow for some more granular configuration features that give people more control over their environment.

One significant area for improvement with the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solution lies in its licensing model. The issue primarily revolves around failure to renew the license on time, leading to service termination.

I rate the platform's stability a ten out of ten.

It is a scalable platform. We have deployed 60 access points across our organization.

The initial setup was straightforward and seamless.

The product is expensive. I rate the pricing a nine out of ten.

Using the Meraki portal has significantly streamlined network management tasks. It makes the process much easier by providing visibility and centralized control over the network.

It has primarily addressed reliability concerns related to aging equipment. It has yet to improve operational efficiency, but it has stabilized the environment from an IT perspective.

The feature that I find most beneficial for our networking needs, especially wireless networking, is the portal's reliability and accessibility.

I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten.

The last company I was working for did an overall network revamp project where they replaced all of the access points, switches, and firewalls. We replaced all the aging equipment with new ones including Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solutions.

The automatic VMware update is very useful because you don't have to worry about outages and planning for VMware updates. It is very advantageous from a management point of view. The ability to restrict and review the clients connected to each of our segments. Additionally, the solution is easy to use.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve by having more granularity in terms of the data displayed. However, I understand that with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you need to have a compromise point to what are the functions that you're going to provide to the users versus ease of use. More granularity in terms of the data and the things that you can do to the devices would be helpful. For example, when we wanted to make a change, restriction, or segregation within Palo Alto, we can go to the level of detail that we want. The amount of detail provided is amazing, it is very granular. However, it comes with much more difficulty, it requires a technical understanding of the environment compared to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN. 

I used Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN within the past 12 months.

I have not used the technical support because the equipment was new.

We used other vendor devices previously, such as Dell PowerConnect. We were looking for a solution that was easier to configure and maintain while not compromising the visibility of our environment. That's why we chose the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN solutions because they have user-friendly dashboards to use the equipment and at the same time, it does provide the visibility that we needed to control our traffic in all our branches. 

When you are deploying equipment in remote areas where you don't have many employees having a cloud dashboard where you can make changes to your equipment easily is a large benefit. Having a centralized, single pane of glass dashboard where you can manage all your equipment in one place has been helpful.

The initial setup was very easy considering it is a Cisco solution.

It took us approximately two to three weeks, to migrate small branches which were quite fast. We hadn't migrated the head office systems when I left the company but that implementation would have been more complicated because that's where the data center is involved.

We hired a network architect as a consultant and that team helped us do the whole migration and implementation. When we were doing the setup of switching and the access points, it require a lot less preparation because of its ease of use. Other solutions, such as Palo Alto, required a lot more planning.

We have 12 branches and our head office and we use one person for marinating and supporting the solution. However, we did outsource the support, we pay annually for support from a third-party company that helps us maintain our equipment. They are on call if we need them.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN an eight out of ten.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN was easy to deploy and use, it gives us the functionality that we need to maintain our infrastructure functions, and at the same time, it does provide the security that everybody's looking for these days. We did replace the firewalls with Palo Alto, which gives us another layer of security because Palo Alto's very good in that regard.

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.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN facilitates daily operations by providing reliable connectivity for devices like PCs and machinery. It allows customers to access the Internet and essential applications without needing Ethernet cables.

The platform's most valuable feature is the ability to detect network issues through a dashboard.

The product's interface should be user-friendly. The integration options with third-party applications need enhancement.

I have worked with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for the past 2 years.

The product is super stable. I would rate the stability a ten.

We work with many customers using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, with deployments ranging from small offices to large enterprises. It is sometimes deployed in principal offices, catering to a user base of 15 to 20 individuals. Additionally, there are instances where larger-scale deployments are undertaken, accommodating up to a hundred users.

I rate the platform's scalability an eight out of ten.

Whenever we raise the ticket, we receive prompt assistance from the technical support team.

Positive

The product operates on its cloud platform, but some customers use AWS for certain functionalities. Deployment time varies depending on the scale of the project. It involves setting up wireless access points, configuring IP addresses, and connecting them to the network. Additional configurations are then pushed through the dashboard. It takes approximately a day to complete.

I would rate the initial setup process a ten out of ten.

I would rate the pricing of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as a five. It could be more affordable than other solutions like Aruba.

Customers appreciate the ease of network management provided by Cisco Meraki's centralized dashboard, simplifying operations.

The cloud-based management has made a significant difference in the IT environment of our customers. It enables seamless access and connection to the dashboard, allowing them to troubleshoot network issues promptly. Customers no longer need to connect to the on-premises infrastructure or use specialized tools; instead, they can easily access and manage their network via the dashboard of any device with an internet connection.

It offers built-in security features like firewalls. We have purchased additional licenses for features such as SD-WAN technology.

Before installing it, the users should consider space requirements, network topology, and compatibility with existing IT infrastructure.

I would rate it a nine.

My customer wanted to configure the solution as Wi-Fi instead of a firewall service.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is a user-friendly solution that has good performance and stability.

The solution's pricing could be improved.

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

I don't recall facing any bugs with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, but the patches are done remotely.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is a scalable solution.

It was easy to deploy the solution. We had some help from the support team, making it easier to deploy the solution.

I read the document for a day and deployed it the next day.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is an expensive solution.

Users with a big budget should go with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN. Customers with a low budget can choose Meraki Go, which is less costly than Cisco Meraki and does not require any license.

Cisco Meraki has physical boxes for centralized cloud management. If we are talking about a dashboard, we can configure location-wise, which will be called a network. In an organization, for each location, we can create a new network where it will be managed centrally. I would recommend the solution to other users.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN alone does not give security. In every company, the front-end will be firewalls, which will take care of the compliance part.

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

My company deals with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN since it provides better visibility, from my point of view, making it easier to manage. With Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you don't need to create something else to create controllers. You can just enter in your internet browser to deploy and manage it from there. L7 firewall is also a very good sync option available with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the simplicity of operating it, which is its biggest asset. The product also has similar, if not better, capabilities than traditional wireless access points.

As a daily user of the solution, I haven't found anything that needs improvement. The solution's mobile application and management of dashboards are areas with shortcomings that need improvement.

Though there are a few features that I would like to see in future releases of the product, they cannot be made possible.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for a year. I am an integrator and not an end-user of the solution. I don't remember the product version I use.

It is a very stable solution. Besides a few outages from my power supply, I had no problems with the solution.

It is a scalable solution, though I never tried to use its scalability option. I don't even know how many devices you can add to the product.

I have, unfortunately, never interacted with the technical support team of the product. Based on the opinions of others, I came to know that the product's technical support team is very good.

I don't have any experience with other solutions at a business level. I work with Huawei and TP-Link at home, though I find Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN comparatively superior. Huawei and TP-Link's costs are very low, while Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is more reliable from both hardware and security point of view.

The initial setup of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN was very easy.

Though, I don't remember the steps involved in the deployment process of the solution since it was done a year ago. The deployment process was very simple because I only had to make a few clicks to create an account on the device to complete the deployment process. In the last stage of the deployment process, you need to put your license into the product and configure your SSID.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is not a reasonably priced product for home use. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is a reasonably priced product for enterprise-sized businesses.

Apart from the firmware upgrades, no other processes are followed to maintain the solution.

I wouldn't recommend the product to those planning to use it at their home. I recommend the product to those planning to use it commercially in a certain industry or market.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.