Meraki MX Reviews

The product is used as a firewall. We can use it in remote sites like end-user client offices and data centers.

Ease of management is the best thing about the solution. Cloud management is pretty much the driver.

Most firewall vendors provide a pretty good amount of logging information, like errors, issues, and warnings. Meraki does some of it but does not provide detailed logging information. We can send it to syslog or SIM, but we can't get it from the portal or the device itself. It would be nice to get detailed logging information without third-party software.

I am using the solution currently.

The tool is quite stable. The stability is generally very good.

The scalability is generally pretty good as long as we size it properly. Once we hit a threshold on memory or throughput on a device, we'll have to upgrade it physically. It's a hit or miss. We have to make sure we size it right. If a client is going to stay the same size for quite a while, then it's pretty much all set.

Generally, I don't hear any complaints about the support team. So, I think it's probably decent.

The initial setup was pretty easy and pretty simple.

The time taken for deployment depends on the environment. In some cases, it takes just a couple of hours. It could take a lot longer if it’s a larger environment with multiple locations. Usually, it can be done on the same day. We've got hundreds of clients, so we have a team focusing on upgrades and maintenance. For an individual environment, especially a smaller one, the maintenance can easily be done by one person. We need a team to maintain the tool for a medium or enterprise-level company. If it's only a couple of firewalls or within ten or twenty, it's pretty easy to maintain it. It's all cloud-based, so it's really simple.

I rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The larger MX products are on the expensive side. It is not in the top price range, but it is closer to high than low.

People considering using the product must ensure it's sized properly for the amount of traffic in the environment they’re putting it in. Generally, it's a pretty straightforward product. However, it must provide extended logging. I'd probably rate the solution a nine out of ten if it provided more extensive logging. Overall, I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

We are using the solution for end users with particular wireless infrastructures. We used it in a single branch to directly terminate the internet link.

It's flexible, easy to configure, and easy to manage.

Pricing is an area where the solution lacks since it is an expensive tool. Pricing needs to be improved.

I have been using Meraki MX for the last five years. Also, I am using the solution's latest version.

It is a stable product. Since last year, working at my current organization, I haven't found any issues.

Previously, in about 100 branches, Meraki was installed. Right now, we are at the stage where we are installing it in 150 branches. In short, we have added 50 more branches, and it's working smoothly.

I don't have the user count in hand, but about 150 branches are using the solution.

I do have plans to increase the usage of the solution.

I have contacted Meraki's technical support. Compared to Citrix, Meraki's technical support is fast and flexible. Within ten to fifteen minutes, the support team acknowledges the issues.

Meraki MX is the first SD-WAN solution I am using. I had done a PoC for Fortinet, but I don't know how the support is from Fortinet.

The setup is straightforward.

One single person can deploy the tool for all the branches. Only two people are managing Meraki, and they are from the same team managing Citrix SD-WAN.

The implementation can be done via Meraki's central portal. If we give access to any device, like MR or MX, it automatically reaches the portal and can be onboarded within five minutes.

It is an expensive solution. There is a five-year licensing requirement. We already renewed licenses for all our devices.

I would tell those planning to use the solution that it's very easy and flexible. However, the solution is very expensive.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight 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 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.

I've used Meraki MX in warehouses for small medical offices and, recently, dispensaries.

To me, the analytics feature is one of the most valuable in Meraki MX. I also find that it has good usability as it's cloud-based.

Another valuable feature of Meraki MX is that it's simple to use and it's user-friendly.

We had minor issues with Meraki MX. We had a couple of RMAs, so that could be an area for improvement, but in terms of how the RMAs went, the turnaround time and getting those back into redeployment were quick.

Another area for improvement in Meraki MX is that when you're scaling for multiple locations, you need to use the same model, but the model you'd need is only available for a short time. The specific model you require could be out of stock, or Meraki isn't making that model anymore, so Meraki should improve that.

I've been using Meraki MX on and off over the past seven to eight years.

As far as stability goes, Meraki MX is pretty good.

In terms of scalability, the process of scaling Meraki MX is straightforward.

The initial setup for Meraki MX is very straightforward.

I work in a mid-sized company, and I've used Meraki MX in small business and enterprise settings. On the small business side, two people use the product, but on the enterprise side, about twenty people use Meraki MX because of the number of locations and equipment. My enterprise customer had about forty thousand employees and at least ninety locations.

I'd rate Meraki MX as nine 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.

We use MX to provide Wifi for all the clients, patients, doctors, nurses, etc. in our hospital, they are using the WiFi to use the internet. So, we are using it mainly for the internet. It is managed via a cloud-based Cisco dashboard.

MX is easy to manage, configure and install. 

MX can only be managed via a web interface, but I'm accustomed to using a CLI or a graphical interface. I would also like to see more reporting features. It doesn't provide enough information for me to know precisely about some clients. 

They could also add improve the content filter by adding Arabic. It only filters English-language content. Meraki should work on that feature for other languages.

I've been using Meraki MX for two or three years. 

MX is stable. The updates go smoothly, and there are no issues.

MX is scalable. We sometimes have 300 to 400 users connected at the same time. It's a highly stable product. 

I used the ADSL Cisco router.  It was a catastrophe due to limitations on users. Once we exceeded around 200 simultaneous users, we started seeing a lot of problems.

Deploying MX is easy. It takes maybe half an hour. I didn't need any support. I could do it all myself.

I believe we need to review our contract and maybe get a lower price when we upgrade our renew our license. Hopefully, we can negotiate with Cisco for lower prices.

I studied other options, but I found Meraki was a complete product for allowing large amounts of users to connect to the internet.

I rate Meraki MX eight out of 10. It is a good product.