Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

I have sold Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN in Pakistan's market since its cloud management features are good.

The product is useful for security purposes, specifically network security or to secure a network. It is useful for our company's clients who want to secure their network over the cloud. The product helps to manage your network centrally.

The product offers solutions for businesses ranging from small to large companies. The product offers HA solutions and redundancy features to ensure reliable operations. Some products don't offer the aforementioned features. The tool offers products for small businesses and large enterprises, with high availability and redundancy features.

There needs to be some work done on security because, with time, some viruses may emerge that one may not know about. The tool provides basic security features for VPNs like IPS and IDS. The tool should have its own lab where engineers can work on new viruses or upcoming and undefined viruses.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than two years. I am a seller of the product.

The product's stability is good. The product can improve in the area of security. The switches provided by the product are good and are commonly used in Pakistan. There is also demand for used switches in Pakistan. In Pakistan, businesses cannot afford new switches, or they face some import-related issues when it comes to products like the Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN. Pakistan market has a few network switches in stock as a backup. In terms of network switches, the tool is good, and I rate it an eight and a half out of ten. In terms of security, the product needs to improve.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

If I compare the other brands in the market, like Sangfor or Sophos, with Cisco in terms of security, I see that Cisco is not a part of the Gartner Report. Cisco is deployed in multinational companies and not in small to mid-sized organizations.

The solution's technical support is good. Through Google, you can get support from the product's community website, on which you can reach out to comments to help you deal with the areas where you are stuck with the product.

The product's initial setup phase is not complex. It is quite easy to configure or deploy it due to its simple and centralized backbone.

The solution is deployed on the cloud model.

The deployment process is easy since you just need to connect the firewall. You can log in to Cisco portal and put in your password and user information, after which it opens your dashboard. You can configure whatever policy you want to implement and use it as per your requirements. You can activate your license by simply putting in the license key. If you face any issues with the tool, you can open a ticket with Cisco's support team or approach resellers. I also help people who face issues with the product. I can align my technical team to help those who have issues with the tool.

Against Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, I offer tools like Sangfor and Sophos. Many of my company's customers opt for Sophos, considering its visibility in the Gartner Report.

only sold a few Cisco Meraki Wireless LANs in the market. My company's clients had asked me about the specific models of the product, and I had them in stock, so I sold them without having to convince them or tell them the technical features of the tool. My company's clients already know about the product via its website and how easy it is to integrate and use the scalability features. My company's clients are also aware of the tool's subscription and base licensing that Cisco offers. As I am a salesperson, I don't think it's difficult to convince IT people to use the tool since they already know about Cisco. It is a positive thing how Cisco has captured the market.

The most valuable feature of the product for network management stems from the fact that the product is flexible, has a centralized dashboard, and offers a yearly subscription-based licensing model and support while being scalable, reliable, and cloud-centric. The tool is already popular in the market.

The tool's analytics are quite capable of securing a user's network, and the insights from Cisco Meraki ITM are good as they allow organizations to get valuable insights in areas like visitor behavior, traffic patterns, and device presence in an environment. There are a lot of resellers that deal in Cisco, so its availability is not difficult.

In terms of the tool's built-in security features, VPN capabilities are quite good. Intrusion detection systems and intrusion prevention systems (IPS) can filter out malicious content and offer advanced security features. The product can offer protection against malware and offer a threat intelligence platform. The tool provides basic features that can be used as default or built-in functionalities.

Considering the technical support and security features, I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

The scalability of the tool aligns with my organization's goals.

I rate the overall tool 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 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 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 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.

I haven't deployed it for myself. I have deployed it for customers. I work for a systems integrator.

We use it for Branch-type of installations where you have a small branch. You just need to manage it via the internet. You don't need a controller-type of environment there, for a small office-type of deployment.

It's a cheaper resource that helps manage a company's WiFi network.

The solution's ease of use is great.

The ease of management has been great.

The initial setup is easy.

The product has been very stable over the years. 

Technical support is okay.

The pricing is reasonable. 

Meraki is still very much a small office type of solution. It is not a fit for large enterprise networks, as it doesn't have tunneling functionalities. 

If you are configuring Meraki as a RADIUS client, you have to add individual 100 or whatever devices on the site as a RADIUS client. There is no RADIUS proxy option. Therefore, it is pretty much still a good use case for small networks, however, it's not a great use case for larger networks. 

The product needs to offer role-based access. 

I've been using the solution for more than ten years now. It's been a decade or so. I have quite a bit of experience with it.

The solution is very stable. As long as your internet links are stable, Meraki works perfectly fine. There are no bugs or glitches. it doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

Meraki is not a very scalable solution. It has its own limitations on the number of devices you can deploy. I would say it's not a very scalable solution.

I've contacted technical support a couple of times. They were okay. I didn't have any issues with them; they are fine.

I've used Cisco EROs, Cisco Meraki, Catalyst 9800, Aruba, and Instant Aruba, controller-based.

The initial setup is not complex or difficult. It's very straightforward. 

The pricing is okay. However, they don't have a perpetual license option. Regardless of what type of functionality a customer is looking for, they have to go for subscription-based licensing.

I'm a Cisco partner.

Meraki is a public cloud. With Meraki, you don't have a private cloud solution.

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

The product's cloud controller is easy to use. 

The product's features for network analysis need improvement. It lags a bit in providing reports for Wi-Fi performance. Additionally, they should offer a higher-end firewall.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than seven years.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's stability a seven out of ten.

We have 800 Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN users in our organization. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

We have used Cisco Aironet and Ruckus products before. Later, we switched to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as we wanted more control of remote office administration. We are a small company that administers switches, configuration, and backup remotely. In comparison, the traditional Cisco switches need upgrading firmware.

I rate the initial setup process an eight out of ten. It takes 30 minutes to configure it and around two hours to complete the installation. We connect the switch to the LAN, which is already connected to the Internet. Once the device is seen on the Meraki portal, we configure it from there.

The product generates a return on investment for us.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is expensive. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a seven out of ten. I advise others to configure the product and then utilize the plug-and-play functionality.

It has limitations for pricing and supply of material. It takes around four months to be delivered. It is very time-consuming.

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.