Cisco Ethernet Switches Reviews

We're primarily using the solution for Jim basically the whole IT infrastructure, including the broadcast facility on the management side. It uses Cisco switches, which we spread out with the 9500 Series as sort of the main switches. We also use 93180s to create the backbone or spine of our setup.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the ability to manage the switches and the ability to have a certain level of familiarity with setting up and configuring the switches. You can link them together and manage them as one single switch.

The biggest pain point we had was getting the switches delivered. However, that likely was due to COVID and everything else. I don't think it's a Cisco issue. It's just a supplier issue, as they seem to have a hard time getting deliveries in order.

One thing we did have to work around is, on the broadcast side, we're reliant on the PTP protocol, precision time protocol, and the Cisco switches in general, don't support that. Some do, however, the majority of ones we're using did not. We worked around it, however, that would be one area for us that would have been simply solved with more capabilities for PTP on Cisco's end.

I've dealt with the solution for a long time, however, my most recent project has just been over the last six or so months.

The solution has been absolutely fine so far and I have yet to run into any scalability issues just yet. A company should be able to expand if they need to.

We have about 100 people using the product at any given time.

I don't really have direct knowledge of technical support, however, I haven't heard anybody mention anything about reaching out to Cisco. They tend to work through their vendor CDW. I'm sure they have some support agreement with Cisco, although I'm really not the person that would be able to answer that. In general, I can't speak to Cisco's support as I've never had reason to reach out to them.

I wasn't directly involved with the configuration, however, it seemed that the main problem we had was just nailing down the requirements. The way I've worked here is there's a central IT department for the company. They're remotely configuring it. There just was a lot of confusion about specific requirements getting imported. Once those were clarified, then there was no problem setting it up. 

I don't think it's a Cisco issue. It's really an internal management issue in this company. The tools were there and once we nailed down the requirements and we understood them, then it seemed to work just fine. We haven't had any problems since then.

In terms of maintenance, there's a core IT team here of about four people with a manager. Then, there are the corporate people that are shared amongst the whole corporation. At any one time, we probably have one of those persons working on some issue here, on average. Overall, we have six people who can handle maintenance, however, it's not full-time. There are other duties too.

The costs and licensing aren't part of my job and therefore I don't know anything of exact pricing.

We provide engineering and technical support services with a hardware-software. It's my understanding that w don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

I'm not sure which version of the solution we're using.

My advice to other organizations is to make sure to ensure that whoever the supplier is, they can commit to delivering and making deliveries. In our case, we're waiting on one switch for instance. It's in the mail. It got lost. Now they're promising delivery by tomorrow. I don't see that as a Cisco issue, however, it is a problem when it comes to getting everything implemented. I would have locked in the vendor that could ensure delivery if I knew these issues would arise. 

Overall, I would rate the solution as a solid eight out of ten.

Cisco is number one in switches. Normally, if a manufacturer does not have the same categories as Cisco, it's not a good switch. Cisco has a lot of features that you never use that are implemented in the software. It's nice to know they are there if you need them. 

For a simple customer, the initial setup is quick and easy.

Technical support is excellent. They are very helpful.

Typically, mid-range customers don't have a need for all of the features embedded in Cisco's software.

The solution is a bit difficult.

I don't like the new way the licensing is set up. I don't like that you have to have a license of 10 years to use the switch. I don't understand that policy. It's not useful for the customer.

There are some features in previous versions or previous models that were automatically included in the software. However, now, in the new switches, they don't have it included. You have to go to an advanced version.

I've been dealing with the solution for the last two decades. It's been 20 years. I have a lot of experience with them.

The performance of the solution is very good. We've found the solution to be reliable.

While I haven't been in touch with Cisco's technical support in the past year, I have worked with them in the past and I have always had a positive experience. I would rate their services nine out of ten. They are knowledgeable and responsive. We are satisfied with eh support they provide. They are likely the best on the market in terms of support.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. It's not difficult or anything. 

There are lots of ways to do the initial configuration. It's very flexible. I typically use the traditional setup, however, you don't necessarily need to.

Deployment times vary. It depends on the client and the environment and what you want to do.

For someone who knows what they are doing, it might take an hour or so to have a suite deployed. Others might need more time or might have to do more integrations with a network that's in production. That could take a week or more. It all depends.

That said, even with configuration and integration in the mix, it's not too difficult. A company shouldn't run into any problems.

There are other manufacturers that may offer better pricing. The price is important. It may be a deciding factor for some.

We are a Cisco partner. We are also a Cisco customer.

I've dealt with a lot of Cisco switches and a lot of different versions over the years.

I would recommend the solution to others. They are likely the first option if you compare it to other manufacturers. The features and performance are superior. It would be difficult to find something better than Cisco. 

We use these switches in our data center core to handle all of the converged networks. They handle our SAN servers as well as other components.

The outer perimeter is handled by the Cisco 2960s, for distribution of traffic to endpoint clients.

These switches help to build the best network, the way we want it. There is a guarantee that makes us feel better about having a secure network.

The most valuable feature is the performance and ability to handle the flow of traffic.

The redundancy that the switches provide is very good.

There is a focus on improving the UI for managing the higher-end switches and routers, but not the traditional ones. Putting in a more complete management infrastructure would help when it comes to handling lower-end switches.

These switches are pretty expensive to put into place, so if they could bring the price point down then it would be really good.

We have been using Cisco Ethernet switches for just over ten years.

This solution very well handles the capability for scaling. It is fairly simple and easy to do.

Sometimes we have issues with certain switches hanging.

I have only indirectly been in contact with technical support through our vendor. Our interactions mostly had to do with registering the product and downloading updates. We have not been in contact concerning a particular issue about a product.

Our initial setup was more than ten years ago, and it is something that has been modified over time. Whatever it was, originally, has been rebuilt. As we continue to add new components, it becomes simpler and easier for us to go forward. 

The deployment for the data center core took four days to get all of the services up and running. This included the interfacing, as well as cutting over to ensure that there was no outage. A lot of this had to do with the waiting time and change control, where the cut-over was done during hours that are less used by the employees.

Our other primary switches were pretty simple to change, as and when required. This was never much of a dealy.

Our vendor assisted us with the original deployment. Our project team consisted of four people and there was an additional person from the vendor.

These switches are expensive, but they are an excellent buy and definitely have value for the investment.

The switches that we have purchased handle our load pretty well. We do not have a high data plan network.

When our switches age beyond the life cycle then each will be replaced with whatever the current model is in the market at the time. In the future, we would like to integrate Cisco Aironet, although Wi-Fi is a bit down the line for us.

Overall, this is a good product but there is always room for improvement. My main complaint about Cisco is the price aspect.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for access aggregation and IP routing.

The queue functionality is the solution's most valuable feature, specifically because we are delivering a lot of Layer 2 services. Layer 2 protocol tunnels work well on Cisco switches.

The solution needs to work on lowering the amount of bugs. We find them quite regularly.

Cisco should offer different equipment. Some features which are needed at present, for example, require making ethernet loopbacks for testing purposes are not available. They need to offer something like this.

The solution isn't quite stable. We do find a lot of bugs. 

For Level 2 switching only, it's okay. 

When you look at advanced features, from time to time we have memory issues.

Some versions of the solution can scale with a stacking option. So far, we've been satisfied with the level of scalability we can achieve. We know what we can do using the right point in the network.

We're satisfied with technical support. They answer quite fast when it comes to troubleshooting on the Cisco side. 

The initial setup was straightforward and easy.

How long deployment takes depends on the configuration of standard features. It may take a few hours. It's more complex when we are using IP or VRF light functions.

You only need one person for deployment and maintenance.

We handled the implementation internally.

The equipment we bought with a perpetual license. We're not using a monthly or yearly licensing model. Any additional costs are reasonable. The hardware and software support came with additional costs.

We are using a variety of Cisco ranges, including 2900, 3600, 3700, 4900, and 7600 series.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

In terms of advice I'd give to those considering implementing the solution, I'd say that they should know what features they want to use in order to choose the right platform. There are solutions, such as Juniper, for example, that vary in performance and in features. Be sure to ask Cisco or any other vendor lots of questions in the design phase to ensure you're choosing the right solution for your company.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. The solution lacks some stability but it compensates by offering great features.

We use Cisco Ethernet Switches in government offices that are in multiple locations.

We have experienced some issues with Cisco SG350 switches. We have not been able to use this switch at normal temperatures as it automatically reboots.

I've been working with Cisco Ethernet Switches for 10 years.

I would rate the stability at ten out of ten.

It is a scalable solution, and we have more than 35 customers who use it.

Technical support staff usually get back to us in 30 minutes to four hours. It took them 24 hours to respond only once. Therefore, I would rate technical support at ten out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is straightforward. For the deployment and maintenance, we have seven technical and non-technical staff members.

The price is very high though it is priced right for the level of quality.

I would recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches and rate it at ten on a scale from one to ten. However, it may not be as available in certain countries such as India.

I've been using Cisco Switches for seven to eight years.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are stable.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are scalable, much more than Jupiter. 

Cisco's technical support is very responsive.

The initial setup for on-prem versions is complex and requires a trained, certified engineer. However, the cloud versions are straightforward. Catalyst switches take around fifteen to thirty minutes to deploy, while the Meraki switches take about twenty minutes.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are expensive, and you have to pay for a warranty and technical support.

I would recommend Cisco Ethernet Switches, as long as you have the budget. I'd rate this solution nine out of ten.

They are superior in their class, and there are different functionalities for different models.

We are using this solution on campus. You can roll-out the feature to anywhere from 100 to 10,000 users. You can link the main campus to the small offices and deploy the features.

The most valuable features of this solution are the auto-complete functionality and the end-to-end functionalities, such as routing with the channel.

The hardware has very good features.

It needs to be more secure. They have to find a more secure way of action.

They should have ways to stop the attacks.

Because of the cyber attacks, they should focus more on VoIP.

This product is very stable.

This solution is very scalable.

Cisco technical support is very good. They provide timely and valuable support.

The initial setup is straightforward. 

The installation is quite simple and quite easy to configure.

They provide good examples that are available on the website. It's very easy to navigate to go through the documents.

We can design as per our requirements.

Depending on the features the deployment and implementation can take anywhere from thirty minutes to two hours.

More technical guys are required for the deployment of the features and the testing can be managed by two.

A team of three to five members is enough to deploy and test all of the features.

With all of the features and when you compare with other solutions, the cost is much less.

I can recommend these switches to others who are interested in using them.

I would rate Cisco Ethernet Switches a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is for ethernet switches. We mainly use switches and routers as edge distribution switches. Some of the plants have been with the big pharmaceutical company Aragon. We have also been with a North American company, and others. Most of their switches were Cisco in pharmaceutical company where I worked for 10 years.

Some of the switches in the plants were used as a core. Many of them, especially in Bulgaria and in Europe, I installed myself. Others in America are responsible during the shift time for the configuration changes and so on. They are used in any level, as a Layer 3, Layer 2, whatever. All kinds of switches are used in the different places in our LAN. 

Cisco Ethernet Switches are great devices. I remember when we decided to replace all the HP switches from the American company when they acquired us. We replaced all the core switches with 3850, except in the bigger and biggest sites where we used the 4745 switches. That was great. They are very useful and very easy to configure. It was not much trouble at all and we got a more stable network.

We have been very satisfied with using Cisco 2960 series X with EIGRP Cisco proprietary protocol. This saved us much money and worked very stably.

We also installed 47 and 3850 Switches to the main servers on the 10-gig in some places and Nexus devices using 40-gig connectivity.

We are less in the Cloud because the Cloud technologies didn't work so well. That happened in all of the companies where I've been engaged.

I have been using Cisco Ethernet Switches for a few months in my current position but I would say 20 years or more in other companies.

The stability is great. Some Aruba devices are more stable, but with Cisco, we never had problems, with some little exceptions. It is very stable.

It is very scalable.

In this company we have a single usage. I first started with Cisco routers in 1997, now we install Cisco routers all the time.

The technical support for the core switches especially, but for the rest as well, is very good. It's excellent support. Especially for the core switches we had 24/7 support. On some sites in Bulgaria we one time had a problem at midnight and they delivered that switch in time. They brought the switch very fast. Very good, excellent, technical support solution.

Also, with previous accounts with the pharmaceutical company we had access to a dedicated engineer for the project. We had access to their WAP environment. So, all told, tech support is brilliant.

I have used Aruba which is very similar to Cisco. It is also easy to manage and to install. Installing it is straightforward but I don't have too much experience with the priority. We were responsible for their LAN but they have some special requirements which we didn't touch. We didn't use all functionalities in the Aruba. We just used them as Layer 2 switches or as access switches on the main site, and on the bigger sites they had still some old HP switches.

Also, if I remember correctly, Comware had all those old HP switches. We used Aruba just as Layer 2 access devices and didn't use much of the functionalities.

I prefer Cisco. Of course, Aruba is cheaper overall but not necessarily for those small Layer 2 device access switches. I don't know what the price is now, I didn't compare each comparable device. If I had to choose, I would definitely go with the Cisco.

In terms of the initial setup, for me, with much experience, it's straightforward. With most of the switches we had a good team and prepared more than the configuration on the access sheet and then automatically generated the configuration file, just moved it to the note part, visually checking for a minute. Then copy, paste, and done. Start installing. Mounting and connecting. Straightforward.

It takes about one day for the device, if you don't count the cabling and the rack mounting and moving those and so on, and including the break, between 30 and 60 minutes, not more, for each switch. If they are stackable with some stack devices, for all of them, let's say an hour to hour and a half. Not more because we had all the configurations prepared in advance.

I you have a big client or if you have a big project and register it, the discount is good. In the companies that I have worked for, mostly for switching, we had a 55% discount or more. So with that good discount, who cares? It's cheap enough.

Cisco Ethernet Switches are appropriate for small and medium businesses. They also are large enough for our data centers which we had in Tel Aviv, Israel and in California. We had such big devices there.

On a scale of one to ten, I would give Cisco Ethernet Switches a 10.

I would advise others who are looking into implementing Cisco to buy and implement it.