Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

The Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is hosted on the cloud. Users enjoy all the features available on the platform, and it facilitates seamless communication for our business operations. Integrating with the router, firewall, and Wireless Controller is advantageous.

The solution could be cheaper.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than 2 years.

The product is stable. It is working well.

The solution’s scalability is good.

Around 20 customers are using this solution.

Technical support is good.

The initial setup is easy and takes 10-30 minutes with zero IP deployment.

It also depends on the customer's requirements. Whether it's a small or large project, the system can accommodate various sizes. LAN configurations have been implemented for better connectivity. One employee can do the deployment.

There are two values, but the first one is that the network demands more. However, the current value lies in using advanced technology. Additionally, its ease of use and deployment facilitates creating a profile of a beneficial customer.

The market is competitive. Customers do not have much money to invest. However, we have a new solution. We are looking for McAfee share.

In Vietnam, the license policy is yearly, which could be one year, three years, or five years.

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

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.

We are resellers and our customers are generally medium to enterprise size organizations. I'm the senior manager and we are partners with Cisco. 

The dashboard is a great feature that is architecturally based and I like the fact that the solution is accessible from anywhere. As an administrator, it is very useful to have access to the dashboard from anywhere through my mobile Meraki app. I can see if there are any issues and can get alerts over my emails. The basic value of the product is the ease of use and ease of access from anywhere. The product is very easy to manage, easy to configure, and easy for our customers to understand. It's the ease of use that sells Meraki. When it's used as a whole stack, Meraki is one of the very good and easy to manage products.

There are a lot of improvements that could be made, especially from the feature point of view. If you compare the Meraki firewall to UTM, Meraki has close to 90% of all the features that UTM offers but there are some that are lacking and that need to be rectified. For example, UTM has a feature that enables you to block videos inside Facebook or block particular applications inside another application. In Meraki, you can only block the entire app or the entire URL. For example, you can block the category video, but not any applications that are inside apps. When it comes to switching, Meraki lacks categories of features, like the traditional Cisco, Aruba, or Ruckus app, and I think they need to increase the number of modules and categories of switches.

I've been using this solution for almost six years. 

 The product is stable and I have not seen any issues over the past couple of years.

The solution is scalable, the only problem we had earlier was the Meraki firewall did not support more than two ISC links, but I think the hardware has matured and can now support more than two ISC links. Some years ago now, Meraki used to lose many customers because it didn't support more than two ISC links.

It's very easy to get support from Meraki, because everything is there in the dashboard. You just need to open a case through the dashboard and you get good support. 

The pricing is a little higher than other similar architecture products such as Ruckus or Aruba. Meraki has a premium pack added to it so it's costly.

If you're a medium enterprise type of organization, I'd recommend something like Meraki, at least from the wireless point of view, because I think it has a very, very simple and easy-to-use dashboard. As mentioned, it's easy to configure and very easy to manage. Wherever there are very low resources to manage a network, Meraki is the one. If a company isn't managing many people and there aren't too many network administrators, it's a very good solution. 

I rate the solution seven out of 10. 

We use it for Wi-Fi.

It is cloud-based. You can manage it remotely from anywhere in the world, and you don't have to be on-site, which is a very big advantage.

It is super expensive for what you get. I just wish it was less expensive.

I have been using this solution for 20 years.

It is stable and very reliable.

You just buy more. In terms of the number of users, it is used by everyone in the organization. It is Wi-Fi, so you hook your phone or laptop. Everybody uses it.

Their technical support is very good. I would rate them a ten out of ten.

I've used Ubiquiti. The reason I use them is that they're very inexpensive, but they're not cloud-based. You have to be on-premises in order to manage them.

It is really easy.

It is super expensive for what you get. You also have to buy a license every year. Otherwise, it stops working.

If you can afford it, you should go for it.

I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a six out of ten. The biggest downside is the yearly fee and the initial price, but it is very reliable.

We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for offices, small retail stores, and restaurants. Most of our clients are medium-sized businesses.

Most of our clients have around 200 employees. There are around 50 access point users.

Only one person is required for maintenance.

The captive portal feature is my favorite. It allows us to keep track of how many people are entering our client's businesses. 

Also, the security and content filtering that's included on the cloud is great.

The signal coverage radius could be extended. I would also like to have a planner for designs. 

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for roughly eight years.

Stability-wise, it's very good. The problem is the coverage.

Scalability-wise, it's excellent. You can integrate with other products like MX, the firewall and router of Meraki, and you can also integrate with Umbrella which is cloud security from Cisco. You can also add more access points very easily.

Cisco's technical support is excellent. Still, sometimes it takes a while for them to respond. There is also a lot of information on their web page for support.

We used to use Aruba and Cisco Access Point. Cloud management was the main difference between these solutions. We have more flexibility with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

The initial setup is easy but it's important to have training.

Configuration takes around one hour. It's the same for any access point but the installation depends on the physical installation — overall, it takes around three hours.

Meraki is a very good solution, but the price is quite high for small markets. We are based in Mexico and within Latin America, most of our customers think that this is an expensive solution compared to other brands. Overall, we think that the price is too high.

For example, the cheapest license subscription is around $600. It's around $1,200 for one access point. This is really expensive for one customer. Other brands charge the same amount for around five access points.

I'd recommend this solution because it's easy to use and secure — the security is integrated. Apps can also be integrated very easily and it's very scalable. 

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a rating of eight. 

We resell it to our customers for networking, wifi, and security.

For some of our larger clients, it has enabled them to not need to grow staff in order to retain a large 13 access point network has needed a lot of reconfiguration because of the nature of our business. We are able to maintain that and the responses even after hours because we can usually make changes rapidly.

Its ability to be cloud-managed is the most valuable feature so if there's a reconfiguration or an issue, we have excellent visibility into the network and we can usually resolve the problem online without having to go onsite.

The logging sometimes doesn't give us the granularity needed. Some of the rules are a bit more complicated. The switch ports on the routers are not individually addressable, in the sense that with a switch you can tell what MAC address is on what port but with the security appliances, you can't, which would be beneficial for troubleshooting.

I would like to see more information on what is plugged into each MX switch port. I would also like to be able to see that the templates would be able to be used because we're in MSP, so if I create a template, I have to recreate the template with each of our clients. I'd prefer to create one template and then personalize it for each client which is a little extra work that way. 

The dashboard security is not as good as it could be in terms of provision users. If I provision the user at the high level, I'd like to give them rights to our customers so if I have a new technician, I have to go and touch each customer and add that technician which is kind of silly. 

It's quite stable. There are relatively few issues we've had with the product. Compared to others, it's more stable than most.

It scales well up to the larger midsize enterprise. The MX appliances are less scalable than the wifi or the switches. They're a little underpowered and so that's the point where you'd move to a different solution if you needed more scalability if you had more bandwidth requirements. We currently have 150 users. 

Their technical support is good. It's really easy to get someone and they try to help and work to resolve the issue. I'm pleased with their support.

We've also used D-Link, Netgear, and other similar solutions and Cisco small business solutions as well. We found Meraki is easier to deploy and easier to maintain.

We also evaluated WatchGuard, SonicWall, and Ubiquiti but we found Meraki to be superior. 

The initial setup. The deployment was very quick. It takes under half an hour to fully deploy on site.

We've definitely had a good ROI. It helps our support resources as well as gives the customer a good product.

Meraki is certainly not the cheapest solution. The coterminous licensing that they do is a challenge with some of the sites where there's corporate and franchise sites. If a franchise is buying in and they want to put them on the same dashboard, it means that their license is going to expire earlier than it should. The fact that if you don't license it, it just stops working has been a challenge. It's not as friendly as would be ideal, where other solutions will not allow you to do any changes but it will keep working. If some of our clients are less organized at renewals this is a little bit adverse. MX appliances are a little overpriced for their power.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

The most important feature is flexibility.

I believe it is user-friendly. The techie guys don't care for it, but in my opinion, essentially, it has a very simple interface. Most other vendors are now including those in their dashboard features and interfaces as well.

The only concern is when the license has expired and it will no longer function, the entire network goes down, without any notification, or warning.

The price could be reduced.

I have been working with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for four or five years.

The first implementation we did was with the MR32. MR32, MR42, and MR62

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is stable.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is easy to scale.

Technical support is very good.

I used to work for VS Information Systems, and I'm currently looking after the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and the data center infrastructure.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We use a couple of guys for the more physical aspects of the implementation, such as access point mounting.

Because they are cloud-based, we are only using one person for maintenance.

Previously, I did the majority of the configuration by myself. Now, another person has been assigned to the configuration part.

When compared to other vendors, Cisco's pricing is higher.

We did some research and found that we already had the HP solution in-house. Because of the features and feasibility, flexibility, and everything else, as well as the cost, we like the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN.

We haven't received any requests for additional features at the moment. Previously, any request for additional features was made on the other Cisco dashboard, and the majority of them were already implemented on this one.

We have a partnership with Cisco.

For my experience, I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

We are a reseller, and because we're doing mostly refreshes, we have its latest version.

Its interface is not as daunting as others, which makes customers a bit more at ease.

For Meraki, the ease of deployment and management is most valuable.

Meraki leaves a lot to be desired when it comes to the technical capabilities in terms of throughput, spectrum, management, higher-level functions, etc.

I have been using this solution for eight years or so.

Its stability is a five out of 10.

Its scalability is a five out of 10. 

I would probably rate them a six out of 10.

Meraki is probably the most straightforward. 

For its deployment and maintenance, just one engineer is required for a medium-sized company.

The return on the investment with Meraki isn't from scalability, rollout, or saving in hardware costs or software costs. The save is either in terms of the ability to keep the number of technicians that you hire or in terms of being able to outsource it all together to an organization that specializes in it. The higher costs of Meraki are offset by the cost of the people you may have to bring in, depending on your Wi-Fi airspace.

I would advise knowing your use case and matching it to the technology.

I would rate it a six out of 10. It provides ease of management to customers, but it is not for throughput and availability.