[Chugalug] Another Cisco Question
dbmchone at gmail.com
Tue Aug 13 17:15:06 UTC 2013
I honestly believe that Cisco is good stuff and their gear flat out works… The company just doesn't work with us very well and the gear seems to be a bit overcomplicated to me. We tried to buy 50+ 48-port PoE+ switches and they were still about 30-40% MORE than the next competitor even after pitching the 2960S instead of the 3750X. Also, when we evaluated their wireless gear a few years back it actually took the "Cisco Engineers" (the "partner" cisco sent to us to work with) 3 days just to make 5 APs work for our test area. I wasn't impressed.
On Aug 13, 2013, at 12:55 PM, John Aldrich wrote:
> Quoting Bret McHone <dbmchone at gmail.com>:
>> I'm just going to throw this out there. We use Aruba which is traditionally controller based, but they also have Aruba Instant APs which work very well without a controller if your deployment is limited. We are actually going to be deploying some of them at a few of our smaller remote offices as soon as I can get out from under a few of our other projects.
>> I'm honestly not familiar with the current Cisco wireless offerings, but I do know when we evaluated them and compared them to Aruba, they couldn't come close to the same price. I think Cisco was almost 2x the cost between initial investment and licensing.. (We also compared both aruba and cisco to meru? but that was almost laughable)
>> I will throw a disclaimer out there that we have phased out most Cisco gear because of this. For some reason they just can't get pricing anywhere close to their competitors and the feature set differences do not account for the differences in cost...
> Yeah. It's always been my impression that much of what you were paying for with Cisco gear was the label on the front that says "Cisco."
> Chugalug mailing list
> Chugalug at chugalug.org
More information about the Chugalug