Please share with the community what you think needs improvement with Meraki MS Switches.
What are its weaknesses? What would you like to see changed in a future version?
The solution needs to improve its ability to back up the auto-configuration.
The pricing of the product needs to be improved. I find that Cisco products are usually priced quite high. The solution needs to improve its scalability.
The quote-building process is challenging and it needs to be simplified. It is difficult to create a bill of materials and there should be a bundled solution. You still have to select different items from certain locations to build the solution. You can end up leaving out certain items that are needed unless you understand how everything works. Examples are the power supply and the power cable, which are not on the list by default. There should be a top-level part number that allows you to put all of the options that are available, rather than selecting each and every item separately and putting them together.
I would like to see some automation and better integration with the editing tool.
A complaint that I might have about the services is the compliance risk response. If I or our clients put too many devices on a network, threatening emails get triggered by Meraki saying that we are out of compliance. It can put unnecessary fear into the customer of the product that their services will be curtailed or that they will have to pay escalated fees. The customer in turn then pushes the problem on to the reseller — us — which can create an awkward situation. We are seen as a less-trusted advisor because what we provided was poorly planned. I think there is a major problem with warning clients in that way. I've started hearing customers wishing that they had not gotten into a subscription just because of that policy. It is all well good having a subscription policy but making customers edgy is making some consider switching away from Meraki. Losing customers due to the means of enforcement of the subscription service is pretty ill-advised. I think one of the things that Meraki started to develop and then held back on is unified communications. Meraki started beating the drum about using Meraki for VoIP (Voice over Internet Protocol) and then they suddenly stopped it. It would be nice to actually see that coming to the market, especially in the EMEA (Europe, the Middle East, and Africa). With Cisco's acquisitions such as Broadsoft, Meraki could potentially invest in that technology, so they would be able to provide a voice platform backed by Cisco. It could be an excellent situation and fulfill their promises at the same time.
The solution could be simplified a bit.
The licensing would be improved if shorter terms were offered. There is not much training available for this solution. Better online and remote support is needed. I would like to see support for IoT. We need to be able to add an access point without requiring an additional controller.
The price of this solution should be improved. This solution is too simple for some cases, and there should be more configuration options.
The solution doesn't offer anything different from any other solution. It's not a unique product. Sometimes there's a problem with the pricing model they use. They should work to fix this.
One simple way to improve the product is to reconsider the price. They are more expensive than their competitors. You have to take into account that it is Meraki by Cisco and they know they are the best and that if you need a less expensive solution you can buy other products. If you want the best, you have to pay for it. But certainly they are a bit more expensive than the competitors.
Personally, I don't like the product because I don't like the idea of losing all functionality if your license for the cloud is not current and paid or if the cloud cannot be accessed. I wouldn't recommend these switches for most organizations because the cloud-based deployment is restrictive and comes with problems. The only reason I can see choosing this product is if your organization is totally non-IT, on-premises and you are comfortable leaving IT services in the hands of somebody else. Realistically, the pricing should be improved to match the services and features provided. This also should be enhanced so that you are able to use the product when there is no cloud connectivity. Because of dependence on the cloud, my strongest advice to people considering this solution is to make sure you have a reliable internet connection. As far as future improvements to the product, it is not a concern for us as we are not doing additional installations at this point and would probably hope, instead, to phase out the use of the product.