Aetherstore, looks amazing, what about...
-
Oh they definitely updated the badge to make it look new. No doubt there. But the code it is running appears to be Linksys code. Sure, they brought out the latest model number post divesting themselves of the Linksys disaster. But Cisco had integrated the low quality, ridiculous Linksys mindset and kept a Linksys derived "not really Cisco" group going to keep making Linksys style crap after selling the Linksys brand name on to Belkin, is what was implied. Even when they owned Linksys, it was still "Cisco" making the stuff. Just link it was Linksys making Sipura stuff. Once you buy a company, it's you.
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
I'm not purchasing Cisco gear unless hell freezes over
If there is any other option (and there are) then we'll go with that.
Here is an example Netgear Prosafe. Low cost, smart, not managed, with VLAN support and fibre support.
http://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/smart/GS724Tv4.aspx#tab-techspecs
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
I'm not purchasing Cisco gear unless hell freezes over
If there is any other option (and there are) then we'll go with that.
-
@coliver said:
@Breffni-Potter said:
I'm not purchasing Cisco gear unless hell freezes over
If there is any other option (and there are) then we'll go with that.
Those look great and likely I'd recommend them. Just haven't gotten my hands on one yet to test. Netgear Prosafe we have used and recommended for nearly twenty years.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@Breffni-Potter said:
I'm not purchasing Cisco gear unless hell freezes over
If there is any other option (and there are) then we'll go with that.
Here is an example Netgear Prosafe. Low cost, smart, not managed, with VLAN support and fibre support.
http://www.netgear.com/business/products/switches/smart/GS724Tv4.aspx#tab-techspecs
Nothing but problems with those switches. literally I could tell you were about 75 of those are in the trash.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
Oh they definitely updated the badge to make it look new. No doubt there. But the code it is running appears to be Linksys code. Sure, they brought out the latest model number post divesting themselves of the Linksys disaster. But Cisco had integrated the low quality, ridiculous Linksys mindset and kept a Linksys derived "not really Cisco" group going to keep making Linksys style crap after selling the Linksys brand name on to Belkin, is what was implied. Even when they owned Linksys, it was still "Cisco" making the stuff. Just link it was Linksys making Sipura stuff. Once you buy a company, it's you.
It's not the same code at all. I've looked a both. They aren't even the same hardware on the inside.
-
Other than taking a power surge that fried a whole cabinet, haven't had an issue with a single one yet. Knock on wood, of course. The biggest benefit to them is simplicity combined with a price so low you can keep spares cheaper than you can have a support contract on most other gear.
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
It's not the same code at all. I've looked a both. They are even the same hardware on the inside.
Which two are the same hardware?
-
What code is the SG200 running? It isn't' IOS.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@coliver said:
@Breffni-Potter said:
I'm not purchasing Cisco gear unless hell freezes over
If there is any other option (and there are) then we'll go with that.
Those look great and likely I'd recommend them. Just haven't gotten my hands on one yet to test. Netgear Prosafe we have used and recommended for nearly twenty years.
That's what we have standardized on. Working phenomenally well.
-
How many do you have? How long have you had them? We've been talking about getting some.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
What code is the SG200 running? It isn't' IOS.
No it's not IOS but it supports the IOS commands.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
How many do you have? How long have you had them? We've been talking about getting some.
Sorry I meant we've standardized on the Prosafe switches. I am going to get one of the Ubiquiti ones if we need to expand in the future.
-
You might consider the Dell Power Connect Switches or HP Procurves as well. I like them both. I still standardize with Cisco though. I much prefer the Catalyst layer 3 switches over any of them.
The Current SG series is based off the Cisco ESW500 which was never a Linksys product. (suppose to be a replacement for Cisco Catalyst Express)
-
HP Procurves what what we were going to go for, but we need 50 ports, next year's budget when I'm not here
Despite only have 11-12 in an office, It's basically a small conference centre + other activities that go on.
-
@thecreativeone91 I got my CCNA... and the first network admin job I had had 1 Cisco router when I started... but we wound up going with HP Switches because they were more affordable at the time than the Cisco switches. We never looked back!
If I build a new network, unless there is some requirement for Cisco, then I'd build the network with HP from the ground up and not bat an eye.
@Breffni-Potter -- That really irked me when we did our last refresh. The switches went from 50 ports down to 48, lol. It didn't mess us up anywhere, but that was still aggravating!
-
Oh wait, 50 in one building
Post the Fibre links there is 24 needed in eachAnyway, we've kind of derailed the thread slightly.
-
@Breffni-Potter Not too terribly derailed. We were concerned withouw Aetherstore would work over 10/100 Networks... and somebody brought up the recommendation of an upgrade... that would definitely improve Aetherstore's performance.
I'm going to say Aetherstore one more time in this post... just because.
-
@coliver said:
Sorry I meant we've standardized on the Prosafe switches. I am going to get one of the Ubiquiti ones if we need to expand in the future.
Oh okay, same as us. Since 1997. Actually, started on hubs, but still Netgear.
-
@Breffni-Potter said:
HP Procurves what what we were going to go for, but we need 50 ports, next year's budget when I'm not here
ProCurve is nice too. Quite a bit more money, typically, than ProSafe, though. For a non-profit, it seems extravagant in most cases.
