Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN Reviews

We use Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for wireless networks.

We use the solution's bandwidth shaping, URL filtering, and group policy configuration features.

The solution’s pricing could be improved.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for six months.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

The solution's scalability is limitless and can meet our organization's growth. Around 200 users are using the solution in our organization.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

Two people deployed Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN in our organization within a few hours.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

We use the solution to support the IT workforce in the wireless network. The solution has simplified management and seamless connectivity. The solution provides security from viruses and reduces my bandwidth overhead.

We have two types of monitoring. We use a third-party tool to monitor my entire network. In the Meraki dashboard, we use Meraki monitoring for the wireless client. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is deployed on the cloud in our organization. I would recommend Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN to other users.

Overall, I rate the solution ten out of ten.

These switches are part of our wireless network infrastructure. I have implemented them at 15 or 16 locations, each with between one and seven access points (APs).  

The emailing of statuses is the most valuable feature. For example, if you lose power to the building or you lose your internet connection, you get an email to explain that it has happened. This gives you the opportunity, even in the middle of the night, to be en route to solve the problem before the office even opens up.

They provide good visibility on what's going on.

The annual maintenance is something that needs to be changed.

I have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN products for ten years.

These switches are very stable.

The technical support is very good. They are responsible and knowledgeable. On the Meraki side, you get through right away, whereas, on the Cisco side, you put in a call, and then it is difficult to predict when they will return it.

I have a large number of Meraki Wireless LAN switches including MR12, MR16, MR32, MR42, and MR46 models. I also use other Meraki equipment within our infrastructure.

These switches are very easy to set up, and it is also very easy to upgrade the firmware.

These units cost between $800 and $900 per device and on top of that, you have to pay yearly fees for maintenance. The annual maintenance costs about $75 per year, which is why we are moving away from this solution.

We are moving to another line of products because of the yearly maintenance fee.

We will be implementing Fortinet products in our infrastructure, with FortiAPs and our wireless access points. The speed of the FortiAP is triple that of my Meraki MR, and the purchase price is $500 versus $900. The is no annual maintenance fee on the FortiAP.

Fortinet is up and coming and on the leading edge right now.

In summary, this is a good product but we're moving away from Meraki because we no longer want to pay annual maintenance fees.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our use case is remote clinics. We have over 40 remote clinics, and we even use it in our mobile vans or buses for providing free medical to the homeless and those in need. 

We have a hybrid type infrastructure. We have Cisco as well as Aruba, but from the wireless perspective, it is all Aruba due to security and costs. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is deployed in a data center. We have our own infrastructure because of HIPAA compliance and other regulations. When going into the cloud, you don't know who is managing and whether they properly bedded in terms of sensitive, classified, and not classified information or data.

I also use it in my home. I have a cloud in my garage. I have converged network storage and everything else in my garage. My garage is a data center, and I consider it a cloud. I am using the latest version of this solution.

The ability to manage it remotely is the most valuable. If it has an internet connection, you can get to it. It is a great product for remote clinics. We kind of thought about doing this kind of standalone technology. 

Meraki is easy to manage. From a management perspective, it is the easiest to use, especially in the cloud. I like Meraki. I even have it in my home.

I would like to see more cybersecurity. I would like the ability to go in and enhance security. Because WPA2 is becoming obsolete, many devices are now WPA3, but the challenge is that a lot of devices are not yet there. 

I would like to be able to go in and do monitoring, similar to ASPM. ASPM has the ability to monitor who's joining and who's active. It supports two-step monitoring. The stability of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN can also be improved.

I have been using this solution since it came out. 

Its stability could be improved.

It has scalability. It can be scaled depending on your business needs.

Cisco support is amazing. You get what you pay for. I did a network for the border patrol, and we used Cisco and another product called Antera. From the Cisco perspective, we were able to resolve any issues relating to ring networks, but for Antera, we had to rely on somebody from Taiwan, which was a challenge.

Its initial setup is straightforward. We do wireless on all the access points.

We do a three-year or five-year license and support. Its price could be better, but overall, we get competitive prices.

A lot of times, Cisco puts itself out of range, especially with Meraki. I've dealt with a lot of business development from Cisco, and they have always been accommodating, especially in dealing with hospitals or government. There is also a right time to buy it. July is when they are eager to sell a lot of things because that is the end of their calendar year.

I would recommend this solution if it is right for your environment. I would rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten. It is great, but it has room for improvement.

We use the solution for user-end connectivity. 

The tool's most valuable feature is report generation. Its dashboard helps me a lot with user analytics.

Despite being enabled, I've encountered an issue where the alert main dashboard fails to detect when any of the devices go down. Hence, the tool's notification feature should improve. We have also faced issues with integration. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I rate the product's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's scalability a nine out of ten. My company has three users. 

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's tech support is problematic and takes time to respond. We don't even have contact numbers. 

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's deployment is simple. 

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's pricing is high. 

I rate the product a nine out of ten. 

We use the product to manage three SSIDs catering to different network traffic.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN has a valuable cloud management feature. It is easy to manage and monitor cloud activities. It enables quick deployment within all branches for the users. It provides great performance even in 0℃ temperatures in some places.

In some cases, they could include enhanced features in the product, such as a firewall console and traffic analysis.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for three years.

We encounter some issues related to DNS resolution once or twice a year. However, the stability works fine for almost 99% of the time.

The platform is easy and quick to scale. We can add up devices on SSIDs for every configuration or node.

We never contacted Cisco's technical support team directly. We receive services from an authorized partner.

We previously used Fortinet APs integrated with their UTM solution for security. It provides an efficient integration.

It is easy to set up, and we take assistance from a third-party engineer to execute the process. It takes a few hours to complete.

We take help from contractors. They assist us with any queries during implementation.

Cisco Meraki Wireless provides 20 ports and other components like switches at half the price of Aruba HP for the same features.

The platform is expensive. Its licenses for 20 ports cost around $1000, including one year of support services.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a nine out of ten.

The product's cloud controller is easy to use. 

The product's features for network analysis need improvement. It lags a bit in providing reports for Wi-Fi performance. Additionally, they should offer a higher-end firewall.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for more than seven years.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN's stability a seven out of ten.

We have 800 Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN users in our organization. I rate its scalability an eight out of ten.

We have used Cisco Aironet and Ruckus products before. Later, we switched to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN as we wanted more control of remote office administration. We are a small company that administers switches, configuration, and backup remotely. In comparison, the traditional Cisco switches need upgrading firmware.

I rate the initial setup process an eight out of ten. It takes 30 minutes to configure it and around two hours to complete the installation. We connect the switch to the LAN, which is already connected to the Internet. Once the device is seen on the Meraki portal, we configure it from there.

The product generates a return on investment for us.

Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is expensive. I rate its pricing an eight out of ten.

I rate Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN a seven out of ten. I advise others to configure the product and then utilize the plug-and-play functionality.

It has limitations for pricing and supply of material. It takes around four months to be delivered. It is very time-consuming.

The cloud management feature is a great feature of the solution.

Since we have no complaints in our company using the product so far, it looks like we are using a great product.

The solution cannot be looked upon for one year or short term because you will pay back all the discounts they offer the next time you pay for renewal. So, the aforementioned details can be considered under the solution's room for improvement.

We have been using Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN for a couple of years in our company. Information related to the version is something that we can obtain from the portal because it's available there. My company has a partnership with Cisco Meraki.

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

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten. Less than 50 people in my company use the solution.

We didn't need to contact technical support.

The solution's initial setup process was straightforward. In a couple of days, the deployment process was done.

Our in-house team did the implementation.

The box itself is very cheap. The question here is about the subscription because this is what you will pay every year. In the initial year, for purchasing, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN gives you an attractive price. While during renewal, we are not given much discount.

I would recommend others to use it and urge them to pay the subscription upfront so that they can have the best value and discount.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We use the solution for our 100-plus access points.

Cloud management, wireless infrastructure, and implementation are all valuable features.

The wireless infrastructure scalability has room for improvement.

We have been using the solution for seven years.

I give the stability an eight out of ten.

Our ability to scale is determined by our licensing and can be easily managed through cloud consoles. However, the wireless component of our end users poses some scalability challenges.

The initial setup is straightforward. The deployment was completed by the system integrators and engineers which took less than one week.

The implementation was completed in-house.

There are multiple licensing options including three months, six months, and one year.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

We have around 120 access points which support around 70 users at a time for a total of around 7,000 users.