Meraki MX Reviews

Meraki MX is a firewall with wireless capabilities built in. We use the APs in approximately 10 different customer sites.

The most valuable feature of Meraki MX is I can manage the solution from anywhere remotely, I can throttle bandwidth, and create all rules. Additionally, it is secure for our customers.

I have been using Meraki MX for approximately six years.

Meraki MX is a dependable solution.

Meraki MX is scalable. I have the Meraki MX set up from Oklahoma all through several of the big cities in Tennessee and northern Alabama. We use it, and we run it for a particular company for voice-over IP phones. It works well. I don't have any issues with them. We can set up virtual networks, separating data and voice traffic.

Meraki MX firewalls are great for small to medium-sized businesses, but other solutions are better for enterprise-sized companies.

The support from Meraki MX is good. It is easy to get in touch with technical support 24 hours a day, seven days a week. They are responsive and knowledgeable.

I have previously used Barracuda. For larger companies, such as banks and financial institutions, I use Barracuda firewalls. However, they are more complex. You have to have penetration testing. Every year we have penetration testing from external companies to make sure no one can get in because they have federal audits that come in and check banks. Barracuda is the better solution for this purpose, we've had great luck with them. We've always had perfect scores whenever we deploy them and we have external penetration tests. They have a 24-hour day, seven days week support similar to Meraki MX.

Meraki MX is simple to deploy and manage. You only need to plug it in and configure it.

We did the implementation of the solution in-house.

The price of Meraki MX is between $8 and $1,200. Additionally, we typically purchase a three-year enterprise license, and we pay approximately $899 and mark it up a bit.

I would recommend others call us, we can implement the solution for them.

We have three technicians for maintenance, and we all can handle servers, firewalls, and routers. Once we put the Meraki MX in, it doesn't require much maintenance. It has automatic updates and we receive all the firmware updates. Once they're in place, we don't have any issues with them. However, if we do, it's easy to get in and make configuration changes.

I rate Meraki MX a nine out of ten.

I use Meraki MX in my company basically for site-to-site VPN connection, and it serves as a firewall for our normal office environment.

The most valuable features of the solution are the cloud interface for cloud management and the SD-WAN, along with certain features like secure VPN, built-in VPN, SSL, IPSec VPN solutions, and higher availability. It can accommodate carrier support because of which, other than the fiber, I can have one more point to access through a SIM card.

I do not have the kind of feature I need for SSL decryption in Meraki MX. It would be great to see the SSL decryption feature in Meraki MX.

I have been using Meraki MX for three years. I use Meraki MX105. My company is a customer of the product.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I haven't tried the tool's scalability features, but as far as I understood from the tech sheet I saw related to the tool, I rate the solution's scalability a seven out of ten.

Around 300 people in the organization use the solution.

Very rarely do I contact the technical support team of the solution. I usually contact the technical support team of the product when some update happens in the product. I faced some issues while updating the product once, after which I opened a ticket with the support team, and with their guidance and help, I could resolve the issue. The firewall was configured as active-active with high availability, so when one firewall was down, the other one was working fine. I haven't faced too much trouble with the product.

My experience with the support team was fine, and since most of the things are already available on forums, you can manage everything related to the tool by yourself.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

Previously, my company was using Sophos XG Firewall. My company switched from Sophos XG Firewall to Meraki MX. All our company's network devices are from Cisco, and with Meraki MX, we can actually add switches, routers, access points, and everything to the firewall, which in turn offers more stability and secures the network compared to Sophos XG Firewall. Sophos XG Firewall offered an IDPS firewall capable of stopping any kind of intrusion, but I was feeling worried about the switches and access point security. Since our contract with Sophos had expired, we moved to Meraki.

The product's initial setup phase is very easy. It has a very good web interface that is easy to manage and operate.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The deployment was carried out in two sites, which took around two days to complete.

In my country, the product is cheap compared to the UK because of the differences in taxes.

If you are looking for a solution that is easy to manage and offers stability, and if you are not really very specific about SSL decryption, then you can go for Meraki MX.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.

The primary use case for Meraki MX is to establish a wide Internet drive over the Internet. We use it as a perimeter firewall and also as an SD-WAN device to establish secure tunnels and dynamically route applications over the best available route.

Meraki MX provides visibility from the network, especially if the customer has more than just the MX, including APs and switches. It offers a single management platform with visibility of the entire network.

What is valuable about Meraki MX is its unified threat management capabilities. Features are straightforward to use as you switch them on or off, which can be advantageous from a simplicity point of view.

Generally, the feedback is about the visibility of the network. Sometimes you want a little bit more control, and you don't have that control with Meraki MX.

We have been selling the Meraki MX for probably about seven or eight years now.

The stability of Meraki MX is very good. I would rate it as a nine out of ten, indicating it is very stable.

The scalability of Meraki MX is quite expansive. They range from smaller Z devices up to the big MX. It's generally scalable with little to no issues.

Technical support from Cisco is also very good. I would recommend a nine out of ten. The customer service and support have been satisfactory.

Positive

It always requires getting our system integrators involved. The initial setup is not overly complex, but it requires someone with experience to do a bit of configuration.

I would say the costs are fairly competitive. I would rate it as a seven or eight in terms of how competitive it is.

Competitors for Meraki MX include Fortinet and Aruba.

Yes, I can recommend Meraki MX to other users. It has the Cisco name behind it, which is well-known in the industry. The support is great, and it’s generally competitive from a customer perspective.

We use Meraki MX for the firewall, but typically, it's a great VPN software.

Meraki MX's VPN access for remote use is a valuable feature. The solution is good for load balancing.

The solution's pricing should be reduced. There are other remote tools out there for VPN access, and Meraki MX is gradually losing ground because it's expensive.

My new business owner went from having 14 devices to seven and then from seven to two. Now, I'm only paying for two licenses. I'll soon be moving away from Meraki entirely. The solution's price should be reduced so that new businesses can easily use it.

I have been using Meraki MX for ten years.

Meraki MX is a very stable solution.

Meraki MX is a scalable solution. Around 14 users are using the solution in our organization.

Since Meraki MX has a graphical user interface, its initial setup is pretty straightforward. However, you need either a consultant or a technical expert to install the solution.

Meraki MX can be typically deployed within one to two hours. We implemented the solution through an in-house team.

You need to know the business use case for which you want to use the solution. If you want to use the solution for load balancing, you need to specify the use cases for which you want to use it and all that will be considered.

We have seen a return on investment with Meraki MX.

Meraki MX is an expensive solution. Meraki MX is a cloud-based solution, and we pay an annual license for our physical device.

We deployed the physical server, but Meraki MX is cloud-based.

Overall, I rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

As a telecommunications company, we use the tool for our customers. We use it for SD-WAN and standalone devices with Wi-Fi.

The features vary for each customer. The simplicity of configuration is the most valuable feature of the solution.

The product could incorporate tools like ThousandEyes into the system so we can see things directly. If we are going to a public cloud and do not have an end device in the cloud that we can monitor from the dashboard, the tools will allow us to see what a service or customer experience looks like going across that network.

I have been using the solution for about three years.

I rate the tool’s stability a nine out of ten. Stability is very good, but it's not absolutely perfect.

The scalability based on the number of devices is pretty good. However, scalability based on the bandwidth is quite limited. About 35 customers are using the solution.

Technical support's pretty good.

The initial setup is quite straightforward.

We buy a free license upfront. Our customers pay for the solution on a monthly basis. All licenses are expensive compared to what they used to be in the routing domain a few years ago.

If someone wants a couple of SD-WAN components, it's a simple solution. It's more complex for others who require better bandwidth and bigger devices. We can talk to our customers about their needs and make the tool fit the customer's needs. Overall, I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

Whenever a customer has a linear environment, we generally prefer Meraki MX since it doesn't require any manpower or IT-related managers to deploy it. It's better to use Meraki MX because it has a single dashboard. The solution allows customers to utilize their complete infrastructure like MX firewalls, MS switches, or MR wireless access points. Meraki MX provides ease of use for the customer.

Customers have to understand that Meraki MX is a license-based product, and the device won't work without a license. Since it has an integrated dashboard for all the products, customers can get complete network analytics regarding what the user is doing, monitoring, and observing. It is easy to use, and as an admin, I can get details of every device in the dashboard from my home or anywhere else.

Also, we can easily find out if there is any breakout and if the device has failed suddenly, even at midnight. We can easily trace out if there is any issue with the device, cable, or port. We can find out everything and get the details from the dashboard. The solution's dashboard is flexible and can be easily operated by anybody. Even a non-IT guy can also manage the Meraki infrastructure.

The solution's lead time should be improved because the deliveries are a bit slow. The current lead time is longer for Meraki MX, and it needs to be improved. We currently take two to three months to get the materials, but customers are not willing to wait that long. We need to improve the lead time so customers can get their products faster.

I have been working with Meraki MX for the last seven years. I have a partnership with Cisco, so I provide the solution to end customers. I am also a reseller.

Meraki MX is a stable product, and I didn't see any challenges or issues regarding the solution's stability from the customer side. If the device fails, it's easy to raise a small ticket or RMA, and you'll get the device within the timeline specified by them.

Meraki MX is an easily scalable solution. I generally take care of medium and enterprise customers. I have worked on every segment. Generally, mid-size and enterprise-level customers with multiple branches opt for Meraki MX.

The solution's technical support team is very good. Whenever we raise a TAC ticket, they generally come on live and take the case. We rarely use Cisco TAC because, as of now, we are able to implement it ourselves. So whenever required, we generally use the technical services of Cisco.

Positive

I used to work with Cisco's standalone firewalls, such as the ASA and FTD firewalls. However, I am now predominantly working with the Meraki MX firewall.

Compared to other solutions, Meraki MX is easy to configure. We don't need to go for the CLI command prompt configurations. Everything is easy with Meraki MX since it has a completely dashboard-related configuration.

Meraki MX's initial setup is very easy, and you can easily install the solution.

Once you know the dashboard serial number and license key, you can configure the dashboard before getting the devices and then add the devices. Later, you just need to plug in these devices with the internet, and then you can easily configure it.

If you get four hours, you can take a small downtime from the customer and install the solution very easily. Even the updates will take over the night. So there is no manpower or time required to do these activities. You can initiate the patches and all kinds of downtime activities from home.

One or two people are needed for the solution's deployment. The solution's maintenance is very easy and not difficult at all.

Meraki MX's pricing is cheaper as compared to Cisco's standalone products. You need to take a yearly, three years, or five years license for the solution.

Generally, customers need to pay for the product's hardware and license. Apart from that, the solution has two types of support called CON-ROB and CON-RO4. This facility is for RMA to replace their devices as quickly as possible.

I advise users to plan for the solution nicely, and if you plan it properly, you won't have any hiccups when you receive the hardware. Generally, a firewall is designed based on the customer's environment, sessions, and users. We need to calculate these factors and need to think about future scalability. If you size the solution appropriately based on these factors, you won't get any hiccups from the solution. Before procuring it, plan nicely for the solution and get the requirements.

Meraki is a good solution that is used by everyone these days.

Overall, I rate Meraki MX ten out of ten.

We use Meraki MX for cloud-based networking, particularly as a firewalls and routers.

What I like best about Meraki MX is that it's easy to deploy remotely. The product works. It has automatic updates.

I also like that Meraki MX is a brilliant device. You turn it on, stick the key in there, activate it, and then you're done.

Meraki MX does what my customers need at the end of the day, so I also like that.

An area for improvement in Meraki MX is that it needs some provision, as supplying the unit through Cisco can be tedious at times, but as far as the product itself and its offerings, Meraki MX is five-star all the way.

I've been dealing with Meraki MX for four years now.

Stability-wise, Meraki MX is okay. It performs as it's supposed to. There was one hardware failure, and the Meraki team replaced the unit practically overnight, no questions asked.

The technical support for Meraki MX is a ten out of ten for me.

Positive

Meraki MX has a straightforward setup.

The pricing for Meraki MX is all right, but as the hardware needs to be licensed, the cost depends on the complexity of the device and the term. Pricing could be $100 to $10,000 yearly or even more for a more complex device.

My company is a Cisco partner and a reseller of Meraki MX.

My rating for Meraki MX is ten out of ten.

I use the solution for some simple usage in our office for the people, so there is nothing too much. I am interested in the scalability of the tool.

The solution's most valuable features stem from the single pane of glass dashboard, along with other components of the tool like configuration, administration, monitoring part, integration capabilities with Cisco solutions, and ease of comparison with other Cisco equipment or Cisco Meraki hardware devices.

I don't think I can comment on what needs improvement in the solution because of the usage of Meraki MX in our company. The tool is not complex. For my type of usage, I am satisfied with the results of the product. I think that I may use the product on a larger scale.

The fact that the product is a little expensive and how it needs to be made cheaper from an improvement perspective is a debatable topic, in my opinion.

I have been using Meraki MX for a year and a half.

I use only Cisco hardware in my building, where I also have my network with Meraki MX. I don't have any problems, and I haven't tested the equipment in a multi-vendor environment.

I didn't reach the need to use a relevant scalability test in my company because I am using the tool for the first time for just two users and four guest users. Before I can talk about scalability, I should use the tool's scalability features.

I prefer Meraki MX for personal use. In professional terms, I am working with Cisco on a regional basis in Europe.

I am happy with the technical support for the solution. I rate the technical support a ten out of ten.

Positive

For networking and my personal use, Meraki MX is the first infrastructure I have experience with, but on a professional side, I use Cisco.

The product's initial setup phase was simple, considering how Meraki's documentation is very intuitive, which explains how to use the platform, its configuration capabilities, and its administration.

The solution is deployed on the private cloud.

Depending on the purpose of the solution for the user, it might be worth the money. If a user wants to use extra hardware equipment at its full potential or full features on a long-term basis, Meraki MX is a good choice. If you don't want to have a complex tool with features, workload, and so on, Meraki MX can come across as an expensive solution.

The product is a little expensive.

I did not choose any other solutions in the market since I got familiar with Meraki MX. I wanted to start with Meraki MX because I thought it was the most appropriate hardware that I could use, especially to add access points, some IoT devices, and switches. Meraki MX is a tool that I can build an infrastructure around.

Within Cisco, I checked for second-generation MV cameras.

For sure, I will recommend the tool's potential users to at least do a demo because one of the best parts of interacting with Meraki is that users can use a demo version for a certain period and do their own tests to see if it is okay or not. After I was okay with the functionalities, I went to use the product for myself.

I rate the overall tool an eight out of ten.