We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"It is easy to deploy, maintain, and update. It has been trouble-free so far. I am still a Cisco command-line bigot, but the web interface makes it a lot easier for our help desk to interact with a client. When the clients call in and say that they aren't able to connect, it takes the help desk 10 minutes or less to look at everything in the enterprise or location. They can look at the firewall, switches, or access points in the dashboard. That's why I like the dashboard."
"The dashboard and the interface, in general, are good features."
"You can access a single pane of glass and configure all the devices via the same access."
"It is easy to configure and provides complete visibility of the graphic end point."
"Being able to look at every port and see what it is connected to is very useful. Everything seems to be running really well. They've got everything covered. They have a really cool mounting system at the bottom and an access point that you can use to level up your device. It is kind of cool."
"The main features of Meraki MS Switches are integration, high quality, and hardware guarantee."
"This product has QoS, decent visibility of what's going on, and it's a managed switch."
"The initial setup is simple."
"The wiki page that describes the scripting and other features is very good."
"The GUI is easy to use."
"The most valuable feature is that it has better throughput than its competitors."
"There are a lot of features to control permitting or stopping packets in the network."
"This solution is very similar to the on-premises version making it easy to use for those who know the architect."
"It can have better security. It needs more security enhancements, and in particular, a zero-trust element. If we could have external and internal users vetted in the same way as a zero-trust network, that will be handy."
"Clients are very confused by technical support. They seem to have trouble reaching Meraki to get the assistance they need."
"The product demonstrates poor price per performance when compared with its competitors."
"The biggest area that they fall short on is comparing the performance."
"On the switches, I don't know a whole lot that I would change. Different levels of switches have different layer 2 and layer 3 functionality. It's always nice to have layer 3 functionality across the board if you can, but that drives up the cost. They've got different lines for different amounts of layer 3 functionality. However, on their models that do include full layer 3 access, when you choose to use layer 3 on a switch, it doesn't have the full functioning routing capabilities of an MX firewall. It can be limiting in some of those aspects."
"Technical support hold times seem to be getting longer."
"The pain point for our customers is the pricing and it should be reduced to make it more competitive."
"Better alerting capabilities are needed because they do not provide enough notification or detail about events."
"Improvements are needed with respect to some of the security, especially for VPN links between vendors other than Cisco."
"Antispam and antivirus features should be included in the future."
"If MikroTik had a marketing team and support team in India then it would be much easier for us to get the product, as well as support."
"The user interface could improve and they should allow a license for IBS."
"There has to be more development in the OS. It's complex for this switch as compared to others like Cisco. For NetGear and Cisco, it's easy to adapt the VLAN concept but it should be simplified for MikroTik."
"We paid for our switches outright, at a cost of between $15,000 USD and $18,000 USD."
"This product is quite expensive."
"Its price is definitely competitive."
"The licensing is purchased on a one, three, five, and seven year basis."
"The pricing is overvalued in relation to the product's performance."
"They can get the price down for small businesses. The way I bought it, I paid hardly anything, and I got all my licensing with it. The firewall appliance is around $900, and the switches are around $150. This is for the device itself. For licensing, I signed at $70 or something like that for the switch. Technical Support is included in this."
"We don't use standard licensing. Most of the time, we use the advanced security model. If there is a drawback to Meraki, it is the cost, but you also have to evaluate it based upon the other factors that you do get. Their support is really good; their hardware is really good. The ease of configuration and deployment is really good, but it is more expensive than most."
"The solution is a bit on the pricey side."
"MikroTik is really cheap compared to the competitors."
"This product has a one-time cost and there is no licensing fee."
"The price of the solution is fair and there is a one-time license purchase only."
Meraki MS Switches is ranked 7th in Ethernet Switches with 33 reviews while MikroTik Cloud Router Switch is ranked 15th in Ethernet Switches with 5 reviews. Meraki MS Switches is rated 8.8, while MikroTik Cloud Router Switch is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Meraki MS Switches writes "Offers the ability to select multiple ports at a time in a checkbox". On the other hand, the top reviewer of MikroTik Cloud Router Switch writes "A flexible and cost-effecting product with powerful scripting capability". Meraki MS Switches is most compared with Aruba Switches, Ubiquiti UniFi Switches, NETGEAR Switches, HPE Ethernet Switches and Luxul Switches, whereas MikroTik Cloud Router Switch is most compared with MikroTik Routers and Switches, Netgate TNSR, Cisco Enterprise Routers, Mellanox Switches and NETGEAR Switches. See our Meraki MS Switches vs. MikroTik Cloud Router Switch report.
See our list of best Ethernet Switches vendors.
We monitor all Ethernet Switches 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.