We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and ExtremeManagement based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Management Applications solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."It is a stable solution."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco DNA Center is the AI (Artificial Intelligence) that provides us with valuable information."
"I like the visibility, instant build, network, policies, and the ability to control access. I also like that you can visualize your whole network."
"We have many people from the team who manage a lot of devices. By using Cisco DNA Center, it has taken some of that burden away, we are impressed with it. We did the investment in CAPEX, but in the OPEX was very low."
"The most valuable features of Cisco DNA Center are wireless assurance and visibility."
"The automation features are significant, reducing configuration time. This means outstanding functionality. By deploying the controller automatically, the rest becomes automated"
"The most valuable features of the solution are all of its security features...It is a highly scalable solution."
"The report model is one of the valuable models. We are able to see all the information concentrated in reports, which is very useful. We are able to get the information about the performance of the equipment and check that everything is okay. You can get very useful information across applications, so we have very good experience with their management solutions. It has many functionalities to simplify the administration and monitor the development of the switches or AP. It is easy to deploy, easy to configure. and easy to develop. Its price is also good."
"The technical support services are good."
"I need fewer people to do implementation and support, and I don't have to go on-site to change the configuration or otherwise support the switch."
"The best thing about the solution is that it is all managed from just a single application window. We call this feature a single pane of glass due to the fact that almost all the features are all managed within a single application, or a browser, to be more specific."
"ExtremeManagement brings in the most value by reducing the technical debt to the organization in terms of having to hire personnel to maintain it or contract it."
"There is a limitation with the number of VRFs that you can have in your network, and this has caused us problems with some customers."
"The solution's technical support is an area with which my company's clients have a problem. Cisco doesn't provide good technical support unless a user has a big account that Cisco wants to retain."
"An area for improvement in Cisco DNA Center is the latency in data correlation. For example, sometimes, when an issue happens, and I check the logs, I can't find the corresponding log. There's a delay in log replication, so this is what needs improvement in Cisco DNA Center. Reporting in Cisco DNA Center could also be improved because it only has a few templates, and you can't customize it based on your requirements. There aren't many options available in Cisco DNA Center regarding reporting, versus Cisco Prime, which has excellent features for different levels of detailed reports. I'd like to see real-time data replication in the next release of Cisco DNA Center, similar to what's done in Meraki. Data in Meraki is real-time with no delay, so data is immediately replicated in the cloud. Currently, there's a lag in Cisco DNA Center, and addressing that lag is the enhancement I'd like to see in Cisco DNA Center. The solution also needs to be more user-friendly."
"The product doesn’t have good monitoring capabilities."
"From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor."
"The solution’s security side could be improved."
"We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow."
"Technical support could be better. The price could be better, and it could be more stable."
"Some features are quite difficult to configure and they are very complicated to figure out. Maybe the vendors should introduce a more driven configuration that can clarify the processes a bit more to make the processes more clearly defined."
"It would be great to not need an on-premises SiteIQ license for running a Fabric OS cloud or managing third-party devices."
"They can improve the information period. Currently, we are able to have information for only 14 or 15 days, but we would like to have information for an extended period of maybe 30 days. Their technical support can also be improved in terms of the response time to the tickets."
"It would be helpful if this solution had support for configuring and managing third-party hardware devices."
"There could be better integration with third-party equipment and vendors."
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Management Applications with 37 reviews while ExtremeManagement is ranked 15th in Network Management Applications with 5 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while ExtremeManagement is rated 9.0. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of ExtremeManagement writes "Mature and robust platform; can be used to manage Cisco switches". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Juniper Mist Wired Assurance and Huawei eSight, whereas ExtremeManagement is most compared with DataMiner, ExtremeCloud IQ and SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. ExtremeManagement report.
See our list of best Network Management Applications vendors.
We monitor all Network Management Applications 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.