We performed a comparison between ExtremeSwitching and NETGEAR Switches based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two LAN Switching solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The solution excels in configuration and other aspects. It offers reliability and performance."
"Our vendors are great and they offer very good support services."
"It is meeting our expectations in terms of performance as well as cost-effectiveness."
"ExtremeSwitching is a good, stable platform."
"The most valuable features of ExtremeSwitching are that they are robust and have plenty of features. There is a lot of functionality. They have a lot of other features ExtremeSwitching that you can get involved with but I haven't been using many of them."
"The price is low compared to the competition."
"Setup was easy. It only took a couple of hours to set up."
"The unique ring topology is actually a handy innovation."
"It's nice, if there is an issue, to be able to go in through the remote. The fact that the remote doesn't require a static IP... is nice. They initiate the contact to the outside world, without requiring a static to get in."
"The most important feature is the failover, the LACP links. That's the dual set it allows. We have redundant core switches and, if one fails or one network adapter fails, the other one can take over without problems."
"The ability to mix and match is invaluable. So, we didn't have to run massive super extensive switches in the data closets where it wasn't necessary. Being able to manage it all from one place, as all your network configuration settings went live across your entire building from one management console was really handy."
"The High Bandwidth AV-over-IP functionality of these switches has been fantastic, especially in leaf-and-spine. We've been able to build redundancy and they seem to outperform even the Cisco Catalyst, which is about twice as expensive as the M-series switches are."
"NETGEAR Switches has valuable cybersecurity features."
"The most valuable feature to me is the modular side of things, being able to replace a module and a transceiver at our beck and call. If something goes down, or a piece of equipment is broken, I don't have to replace the whole switch. I can just replace the part that's broken or the part that is no longer working. I can get them back up and working within a matter of minutes, versus having to replace everything and reprogram everything. It's a huge time-saver."
"The product is easy to deploy."
"The initial setup is easy."
"ExtremeSwitching hardware lacks flexibility compared to some other options."
"We noticed over the years that the price of the Extreme Switches has been rising and this will become a concern in the future."
"There are latency issues that need to be addressed."
"The pricing of the universal switches is an area of concern that needs to be improved."
"Their pricing could be a bit cheaper, as Huawei switches offer better pricing."
"Extreme Networks does not have any entry-level products. This is a problem for them because Aruba has an Instant On series, which is new and cost-effective. Cisco also has the 1000 series, and other brands offer entry-level products."
"ExtremeSwitching switches are not prevalent in the industry, so it's harder to go online and research how to deploy their APs or switches. There is a broader user community for Cisco and Juniper because they've been around for a while and everybody has a bit of knowledge they can publish online."
"ExtremeSwitching has many features but having come from Cisco environments, there is a steep learning curve to learning all the functionality."
"NETGEAR Switches could be more secure. Scalability could also be better. This infrastructure is a bit old, and we need something that will be more secure. Something that will introduce WLAN, and we will need the knowledge to go with that. Some of the switches were used for more than seven years. I think it was just their lifespan that was exhausted. But other than that, there haven't been any issues that required us to complain or get concerned."
"What I'd like to see is more compatibility with virtual stacking, so that 4300-series switches and 3300-series switches will actually stack together and that virtual switch stacks, themselves, are not limited to just six devices, so that they can create larger loops with more bandwidth and more redundancy."
"The IGMP specifics of the web management console could use a bit of clarification."
"The web interface has been a little sketchy on occasion. Sometimes I have to reload the page to get things to show up properly, but the switch itself seems fine. The web user interface is a little wonky at times."
"When the power does go out, or if we do a soft shutdown, some of the transceivers or the monitor don't recognize when it turns back on, so I have to physically unplug it and plug it back in and then it works. We're working with NETGEAR's engineers to figure out why that's happening."
"The tool needs to improve its network management. The tool can be also more simplified."
"This product lacks a CLI interface."
"The scalability and warranty should also be improved."
ExtremeSwitching is ranked 7th in LAN Switching with 18 reviews while NETGEAR Switches is ranked 5th in LAN Switching with 51 reviews. ExtremeSwitching is rated 8.4, while NETGEAR Switches is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of ExtremeSwitching writes "Easy to configure, with a switching-level security feature". On the other hand, the top reviewer of NETGEAR Switches writes "You can stack different models of switches which makes the scalability great". ExtremeSwitching is most compared with Cisco Catalyst Switches and Cisco Nexus, whereas NETGEAR Switches is most compared with D-Link Ethernet Switches, Cisco Linksys Ethernet Switches, Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, Cisco Ethernet Switches and MikroTik Routers and Switches. See our ExtremeSwitching vs. NETGEAR Switches report.
See our list of best LAN Switching vendors and best AV Over IP Switching vendors.
We monitor all LAN Switching reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
