Cisco Prime [EOL] Reviews

We use Cisco Prime for managing the switches and wireless.

Cisco Prime allows us to manage all the wireless controllers and access points.

Cisco Prime's initial setup is complex.

We have been using Cisco Prime for 10 years.

I rate Cisco Prime a seven out of ten for stability.

For our organization, Cisco Prime is pretty scalable.

Around eight users use Cisco Prime in our organization. The solution is extensively used in our company.

We're a Cisco network, and we used CiscoWorks before Cisco Prime.

It takes days or even months to get Cisco Prime's setup right. We implement the solution through an in-house team.

Cisco Prime's deployment requires a lot of data to be put inside and a lot of configuration.

The return on investment with Cisco Prime is good but not too fast.

I would recommend Cisco Prime to other users.

Overall, I rate Cisco Prime an eight out of ten.

I use Cisco Prime to check the interfaces and links and generate reports. I use the solution to see which locations are down.

What I found most beneficial from Cisco Prime is that it gives you an insight into what your network does, even when you're not actively monitoring what's going on with your network.

I would love for Cisco Prime to show bandwidth usage and consumption, but I can't monitor bandwidth usage at a given time on the version I use or on the subscription I have available. All I can see on Cisco Prime is the uptime depending on the date range or period I want to have an insight about, so this is an area for improvement in the solution.

If bandwidth usage and consumption data are available, that will help me with my reporting.

I discovered you need another license to see bandwidth utilization data. If Cisco can diffuse that functionality into a single subscription, I can monitor bandwidth usage and see reports and a few other functionalities, which would improve Cisco Prime.

I've been using Cisco Prime for around six months.

Cisco Prime is a stable product. Its stability is eight out of ten.

I've yet to try to scale Cisco Prime.

I've contacted Cisco Prime technical support, and as it can be problematic at times and other times pretty seamless, it's a seven out of ten for me.

Neutral

Cisco Prime was the first solution I used, and then I just supplemented it with a free version of PRTG.

I didn't do the initial setup for Cisco Prime because I just came into the company after the setup.

A third party implemented Cisco Prime for the company.

I've used PRTG and then Cisco Prime.

I have to check the version of Cisco Prime that I'm currently using, but I'm sure it isn't the latest version.

A third party deals with Cisco Prime, which can sometimes be troublesome, though it's pretty seamless at other times.

Up to thirty people use the solution within the company.

I'd tell people looking into Cisco Prime that the decision should be based on what you need the solution for. What are you looking to monitor? It would be best if you also looked into licenses supporting your use case. This is the best way to go about it.

My rating for Cisco Prime is eight out of ten.

We use this solution to troubleshoot our wireless systems, specifically regarding signal strength. We have 10 users and 5 admins for maintenance of this solution. 

This solution could be improved if it could monitor configuration changes.

I have been using this solution for five years. 

This is not a scalable solution. 

The customer service and support for this solution is good. When we have had a technical problem, we have worked together with them to fix any issues. 

Positive

We use this solution together with SolarWinds. We use SolarWinds to monitor set up and configuration changes. We use Cisco Prime to troubleshoot network signal.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

I use Cisco Prime to work with VLANs, especially the VLANs that function in my daily business. I deploy security updates, iOS configurations, and configs on the access layer, routers, and switches. I also use reports to troubleshoot problems.

The VLAN mapping function has been most impactful in simplifying our network management tasks.

There is room for improvement in the Access layer. 

I have been using it since 2017. 

I would rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The scalability is great. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten. 

For all functions, we have around 200 end users.

I contacted customer service and support vie email. Their response is okay, but not very fast.

Neutral

The initial setup is very difficult. 

We work with Cisco through our dealer.

Cisco Prime is a great solution for Cisco environments. I don't think other software is the same leader because other software doesn't support Cisco hardware like Cisco software does. It's very familiar.

For the Cisco environment, I would rate Cisco Prime a ten out of ten. 

We use Cisco Prime to manage all of the wireless infrastructure in our stores and campus distribution centers. In our distribution centers we also monitor switches so we can do rogue AP detection. I'm the IT wireless manager and we are customers of Cisco Prime. 

I'm required to produce a rogue report once a quarter and also to provide a summary. The map overview of our campus environment shows the distribution of RF frequency channels and the distribution of a client. It provides us with a great idea of where the busier areas are within our environment to allow us to tweak and tune. The reporting is also a great feature because everyone sees which APs and which clients are the busiest, as well as the busiest applications. This solution enables us to do that.

Cisco is currently moving to DNA Center which has a lot of extra features we're looking forward to using. I think many of the gaps currently in Cisco Prime will be implemented in DNA Center. For now, because there are more and more devices in enterprise organizations that are wireless, it's the platform that's depended on. Cisco Prime is slow at times, we often have to restart the database to run reports or to gain access. We have it deployed on a VM, and that was a mistake, because when you put it on VM, the resources and management don't function well. The good still outweighs the bad, but when we have these ongoing problems, performance is not ideal. 

For additional features, I'd like to see support for Ekahau Site Survey maps. Some competing companies allow you to import that together with its AP attributes, so you can perform your predictive, or post site surveys and incorporate them into their management system. It ensures you don't have to start from scratch and then import a new map and new APs with all of the attributes. Having some level of ability to work with either AirMagnet or Ekahau, the two top wireless analysis tools on the market, is where you can gain great benefit for supporting large deployments.

I've been using this solution for 12 years. 

If you're using a VM, stability is iffy, probably around 80% stable. 

We currently have 10 Prime servers and when I compare it to the competition, it can handle more devices than competing companies. From a scalability standpoint, it seems to be able to support more devices. We have our operations department which troubleshoots on a daily basis. Our wireless engineering team set up new facilities, put in new maps and AP placements. There are two groups - operations and engineering. We have a few people involved in that area. 

The technical support is very helpful and very knowledgeable.

Working for a larger company, we were using Wavelink to manage our first and second generation access points. Wavelink is a vendor-agnostic management tool to manage APs. When you choose a more sophisticated solution, such as Cisco, as our vendor for deploying nationwide, it made sense to select a management tool that's going to allow us to manage, deploy, report, and provide PCI requirements. Those are the main reasons we switched. 

The initial setup was straightforward.

We're not like a normal company, we get steep discounts from Cisco, although they do compete well on a pricing level with other similar solutions. 

Anyone wanting to implement this now should deploy DNA Center and I would recommend against using VMs if possible.

I would rate this solution an eight out of 10. 

We use it primarily for managing the wireless infrastructure, which is the use case in our current scenario.

Cisco Prime, from a management perspective, has good reporting.

For our use cases, where we have reachability issues, we can fine-tune and bump up the coverage by increasing the signal strength. The insights that it provides are great.

The initial setup is easy.

The solution scales well.

It has proven to be quite stable. 

Migrating from on-prem to the cloud is seamless.

The solution offers excellent documentation. 

If you look at some of the wireless site-survey tools that are available in the commercial space, Cisco should include similar solutions, which would help our on-plant engineers when they're doing a site survey. For example, there are some great features in Ekahau. We use it primarily for doing heat mapping, WiFi design, and spectrum analysis. Prime has certain limitations when you compare it with Ekahau. If they can't build a product, they should go for an acquisition.

Mostly, we are happy with the features on offer. Their roadmap is also clear with the DNS Center and the DNS Center stability. Once it becomes more stable and accepted across the industry, I don't see any major challenges. Cisco Prime is more of a network management solution, NMS. The roadmap is clear and Cisco wants to position DNS Center as an immediate replacement for all these other Cisco products, which is absolutely fine.

We've used the solution for more than five years. 

It is pretty stable. On a scale of five, five being the highest, we could rate it at four. 

There are very minor issues. However, those are very negligible in nature. Overall it is a very decent tool.

The product is scalable. 

We have three people working directly with the solution in our organization. They are across the globe and offer 24/7 coverage.

The product is used on a daily basis. 

If you asked me five years ago, the complexity was less. Now, the complexity has increased. So the quality of work also has taken a slight hit with respect to their tax support especially. 

Earlier, on a scale of one to ten, if you asked me, ten being the highest, their tax support was somewhere about seven and eight. Now it has gone to five and six since you hardly get CCIE-certified engineers when you are dealing with certain advanced issues, and that is where we lose a lot of time. That is a concerning factor that they need to address.

It's been a gradual decrease since they have started already losing out some of their customer base to multiple competitors out there in the market. The decision lies with Cisco - whether they want to position themselves as a LAN-networking gold-standard or a platinum-standard player in the market. They need to move very quickly, especially in the wireless area.

Neutral

We use Cisco products predominantly.

I have tested Meraki as well, and I'm very comfortable with Prime since, for the kind of data that we use as a performance metric scale, Prime provides us with what is very essential. Meraki may be glorified reporting in a simplified way for more non-technical people. Good, technically sound people will tend to go more toward Cisco Prime.

We have used Aruba AirWave with Cisco Prime. The major advantage is that Cisco has a DNS Center under their roadmap, which provides a single pane for your entire network troubleshooting stack, right from the user device all the way back to your application. That is possible through DNA Center, whereas Aruba AirWave still needs to catch up in that area.

It is straightforward to set up. It is not complex at all.

I'd rate the ease of setup at a three out of five. Eventually, we will be moving to DNA Center, and DNA Center provides a lot more under a single umbrella. So, as far as their roadmap, they're going in the right direction.

Originally, it was an on-prem server where we installed Cisco Prime. Right now, we are moving to the cloud, and it has been very seamless since we migrated from on-prem to the cloud. Cisco's support was pretty good. Their documentation was very clear, so we could do it just by referring to their data sheets and documentation.

The initial setup was handled in-house. 

I see cost being a major factor for their hardware. However, when you buy Aruba AirWave, that is a very expensive product compared to Prime. You need to at least look at price competitiveness.

Cisco's pricing is quite competitive. That said, there are products that provide bare minimal feature sets. It all boils down to the network manager, and what tasks they want to accomplish using a particular tool. If the buyer is very clear, they should not face any issues with taking the product as it will provide a modular license, which is a nice thing.

I'd rate the affordability at a four out of five. It's one of the most competitive options on the market.

They have different licenses. The cost purely depends on the Prime license subscription that we take. They charge differently if we manage LAN devices and take traditional backups on the network switches and devices. Ours is a hybrid license. It is not a locked-down license against X number of devices. That way, it is not that expensive at all.

I don't see any similar product in the market that is as reliable in nature, especially if you talk about its competitors like Juniper or HP. A relevant product, which is widely used in the market, is Aruba and Aruba is just winning based on the cost factor. However, if you remove that cost factor, they're not that great. We did do the POCs for a couple of our very large plants. In fact, it is spread around a couple of kilometers, so you could understand the wireless connectivity, the full wireless POC. In terms of reliability especially, Cisco is light years ahead.

I'm a Cisco customer and end-user.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

The solution helps with the management and support of the enterprise network. 

The tool's performance is fine. 

The product needs to improve its stability. 

I have been using the product for more than 15 years. 

I would rate the solution's stability an eight out of ten since I have encountered bugs in the past. 

My company has 30-50 users for the product. 

The tool's setup is easy. One engineer is enough to handle the deployment and maintenance. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

We use Prime to manage all our Cisco products like wireless controllers, access points, switches, etc. 

The endpoint information Cisco Prime generates helps us troubleshoot, and it's also useful for compliance reporting and endpoint identification.

Cisco Prime is a little outdated. It will soon be discontinued and replaced by DNA Center, which offers similar functionality.

I have used Cisco Prime for about 10 years. 

I rate Cisco Prime 10 out of 10 for stability. 

I rate Prime eight out of 10 for scalability. Prime is a management tool, so the scalability is there. It's sufficient for our environment. 

I rate Cisco support eight out of 10. Overall, Cisco's support team is knowledgeable. They easily understand our questions and provide solutions fast. However, some of their engineers take longer, so I have to deduct a couple of points. 

Positive

I rate Cisco Prime nine out of 10. All Cisco products come with a quick start guide that tells you every step. The initial installation takes a few hours, but it takes longer to integrate and populate the system to capture all your information. You can complete the deployment in two days. 

I rate Cisco Prime seven out of 10 for affordability. All Cisco solutions are expensive. 

I rate Cisco Prime eight out of 10. I recommend it. It's a useful tool for managing large Cisco environments.