From the IT perspective, people are more relying on the cloud for cloud hosting. Instead of having the data center on-premises or hybrid, people are moving towards cloud hosting. The integration with cloud managed services is there. We have some services hosted on Azure. We also have some services hosted on Amazon. We have a plugin with the cloud manager, Meraki MX. It has VMS features available so that we can have the security and our own private cloud connected to Amazon, Azure, or any cloud services, which is a future proof solution.

I would, of course, recommend Meraki MX. Everyone should have this cloud management solution. We never had any problems after the implementation. This solution also gave us the confidence to deploy across the group. If we had experienced, for example, sluggishness, slowness, or some unreliability, we would have not continued deploying it. Based on this, I would strongly recommend that any company in the world can deploy this product without any hesitation or doubt. It's very reliable. 

They are continuously updating the firmware and resolving the issues. They're always there to help you out. So, we should not be worried about this product. I would highly recommend that the Meraki MX appliance should be deployed.

I would rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten. It has got pros and cons, but the pros are more.

The big thing now is SD-WAN and it's been that way for a number of years. I always remind clients that Meraki is one of the biggest players in the SD-WAN market, meaning their hardware is deployed under another label as being the SD-WAN box. I always suggest that clients buy the equipment from Cisco because the provider's likely going to use it anyway and leverage their technology. It's important to size the solution according to your needs. There are different tiers of performance so don't oversize or undersize. It's better to aim a little higher and anticipate replacing the equipment in five years.

I rate the solution 10 out of 10. 

We require at least three to four people to commission the solution because many integration points are required, like the RBAC policy integration. If we want to deploy MAC authentication, then that's an integration requirement. These things consume more time than the product itself.

We would recommend the solution to our clients, but we would also give them options. Meraki MX is not the only solution. It must be made application aware to compete with Juniper or Silver Peak. Overall, I rate the product a six out of ten.

Duo Security integration is fantastic and really shines, but that is really on the Duo Security team for putting it altogether. Cisco AMP integration is lackluster where it is doing it, but we don't see a lot of what it's doing.

When you use Meraki with an XDR, then you get a lot of good data that way. When you have options to get Meraki for port mirroring with a good XDR, then you will get a lot of data. So, its integration is very good. However, your base insights from Meraki will not come from Meraki itself. You have to integrate Meraki MX with an XDR or Stealthwatch NetFlow analysis. Meraki MX struggles to give you the alerts for data it already has.

Meraki is very future-proof. They are ahead of the curve, but they have slowed down. So, they might average out to where some people will catch up. However, they are so far ahead on where I believe people are going that it is hard to see sometimes.

The ease of use and learning curve are a big deal because you will always have turnover in IT that you have to deal with. The best thing you can do is make something easier for newer people to get into, maybe not some of the more complex things that you can do with Meraki. The big lesson learnt: I don't have to spend days training someone up in Meraki. They can do it pretty quickly in a day themselves.

I would rate this solution as a nine out of 10.

If someone has Meraki MX in their organization and they buy a device from a different brand because they cannot afford Cisco, Meraki will not communicate with the device. The same visibility is not provided with other devices. Meraki communicates easily with Cisco devices, and we easily find the issues in the devices. Ideally, Meraki should communicate with a device even if it does not belong to Cisco. Overall, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

My rating for Meraki MX is ten out of ten.

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 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.

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

I've been in this industry for 40 years and this is the simplest and easiest product that I've ever used. What's important to me is it makes my people more capable. Instead of having to rely on one or two people within the company that know the firewalls, this solution is so simple that anyone with a small amount of technical capability can manage it.

Most of our solutions are on-premises, but we do have one MX in the AWS cloud. 

I would rate the product a ten out of ten. 

It is a very good platform for small businesses. It is easy to configure and manage, and it has Talos. It is easy to integrate with other Meraki products. Its contact filtering is also good, and the VPN is very easy to configure with the Auto VPN feature.

It provides good security, but it is not the best. It is for small businesses, and it doesn't have the same functionality as Firepower or other brands, such as Fortinet. It doesn't have the same security as Firepower or FortiGate. I would recommend complementing the security provided by Meraki MX with an endpoint security solution. If you need more security, you can add sandbox security.

I would rate Meraki MX an eight out of 10.

Meraki MX needs improvement in a few areas, including the dashboard, configuration options, firewalls, and technical licensing model. I advise others to go for it if they have more technical expertise for an easy setup process. 

I rate Meraki MX a seven out of ten.

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.

This solution is viable for medium-sized enterprises and even larger ones, presenting an affordable option. The scalability aspect should be factored in, considering the specific branch alterations. For branch placements, Meraki offers a suitable scalability model, adaptable based on the branch size and user count. We own a range of appropriately sized Meraki boxes to address varying branch needs. When attending to any issues, especially during branch implementations, on-site visits might be necessary. However, in the absence of cloud management, Meraki can be easily managed centrally and remotely. This approach facilitates efficient updates, configuration management, and comprehensive visibility, all streamlined within a single dashboard. 

I would rate overall solution a seven out of ten. 

Make sure you have your network planned out, mapped out and you can see exactly where you need the devices installed. Get a Meraki rep to assist you in the device selection and implementation. Also, try before you buy.

I rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. The solution is good, but the price can be improved. I recommend the solution to people who can afford it.

Be prepared for a new way of managing networks. Test it. See the webcast. The zero deployment is a killer feature. Network Products like switches and Wifi do the rest.

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate this product a 7. For us, the license is a big issue and we need to get better facilities, i.e. the original problem.

From any country, it's not easy to manage a product remotely across the world. We are supporting little companies and compatibilities for three countries with different languages. 

It's not easy to deal with because the provider we use doesn't deliver to our country, even Israel. It's a problem we encounter more than the physical system. It's complicated.

The one question we get about the system in Switzerland is that when we send it to the target countries, it's not good.

We need a solution that merges both to be able to access the system and theoretically to target businesses. We don't have this possibility

I was very worried when Cisco purchased Meraki, but surprisingly, they have not changed the organization or product lines for the worse. Cisco has mixed AnyConnect VPN and they now use Talos data for content filtering, which works very well. The hardware is still following the Meraki model which is a good thing.

The suitability of this product depends on the customer's needs. If they don't need really complicated firewall rules, yet want to protect the network and want really good web filtering, then I recommend using Meraki. If on the other hand, they have a really complicated setup and want better filtering, then Sophos is the better option.

Also, if you have your own web server or mail server on-site, then I recommend Sophos. If instead, you have a normal office network with mail stored in the cloud, then I recommend Meraki.

Overall, this is a good product but it does have some limitations. Sophos UTM gives you more options, for example.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend anyone look towards the possibilities of firewalls of this caliber with Meraki. 

Research the top firewalls to compare, depending on how many users and the purpose of the need. It is great to have a firewall like Meraki or FortiGate.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Meraki an eight or nine.

I would absolutely recommend this solution. We will keep on selling this solution. 

I would rate Meraki MX a nine out of ten.

This is a nice device, although I find that when you speak with professionals about it, they put down these combined devices that have many different functionalities. They say that it is not like a bonafide firewall, the same way that they say the Barracuda IPS is not as good as a dedicated one. I wouldn't be able to tell you whether it's good or it's better unless something really bad happens. I don't know, for example, whether it works great or it's that we haven't been attacked yet.

We have a SIEM SOC managed service and as part of it, they rely on the logs that the Meraki generates, so it can't be that bad of a product.

Overall, this is a very nice product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The solution is simple, fast to set up, and brilliant for its use.

I will never go back to any other solution. Right now our corporate network, across the five offices and the data center, is 100% Meraki, Meraki Firewalls, Meraki Switches, and Meraki APs.

You need to be ready to change your mindset of classical firewalls. Meraki is really more powerful with the full stack, which is the real purpose of this solution.

The real advantage with Meraki is the interaction between different prototypes, like Xpoint which is Amex — this is a game-changer. It's great when you have the full stack and you can play with the different settings and interact between Meraki devices.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of eight.

It's a good solution. If they're looking for something that is easy to use, easy to deploy, and easy to support, maybe they should consider Meraki, given the product is very stable.

The features are good. 

The price point is one thing that we need to consider, but it's expected because good products come with slightly increased pricing.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I would rate it a ten out of ten. I'm very happy with the solution. 

I would give this solution about an eight out of ten. They can buy the brand directly or from a partner. They need to consider performance. I have to be totally honest about Meraki. Because of the client VPN, the lack of an easy way to implement templates with Meraki, that's really only enough for an eight.

In terms of advice, I would say you should really prepare for open source because you have more control. For us here, we are well trained in firewalling as we have access to open source software and we are good at it. Open source gets rid of all the licensing issues. Meraki is a good solution, but it's not the best solution out there.

I would rate this solution a five out of ten.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven.

I would recommend Meraki MX. 

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten. It can have better management. 

I would rate this solution nine out of 10. As a solution, there is no need for improvement, it's a good solution.

As advice, I would say that you should look first through the community and see the different issues that people are running up against, so you're aware of what's going on. Meraki is very easy to configure. So if you want an easy to configure firewall, I think Meraki is a good solution for you.

I would rate this solution between an eight and nine out of ten. The product still needs work and the features could be better.

It is a good fit for our business needs and our client needs. 

If you are a small scale company looking for an SD-Wan solution, plus UTM box-type combination, then Meraki is the best option — based on the price and the features available.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of nine.

For this solution, Meraki is still more expensive than FortiGate. The FortiGate license is still less than the Meraki license. 

On a scale from 1 to 10, I would rate Meraki MX firewalls a 7. If they were to add the configuration tools, then it would be much higher.

I don't have much advice to offer — everybody has to do their due diligence.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Meraki MX a rating of eight.

Both Meraki and Aerohive are good products, and I prefer Meraki. I work with Meraki products in production. Meraki are more intuitive than Aerohive.

I would recommend this solution based on the use case. I would rate Meraki MX an eight out of ten.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

If you're thinking about implementing Meraki MX, make sure to plan it properly. Planning takes time which gives you the ability to make sure it's scaled properly, without too much complexity.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of nine — nothing is perfect.