Cisco Switch Controversies and Criticisms | Generated by AI
Question: What are some unpopular or controversial opinions about Cisco switches?
Answer:
Many network engineers love Cisco switches, but there are persistent unpopular opinions that bubble up repeatedly in forums, Reddit (r/networking), and private Slack channels. Here are the most common “hot takes” that tend to get downvoted or start flame wars:
-
Cisco is no longer the “best” enterprise switch – it’s just the most expensive safe choice.
Arista, Juniper (QFX/EX), and even white-box + NOS (SONiC, Cumulus, Nvidia Spectrum) often outperform comparable Cisco Nexus or Catalyst models in throughput, latency, buffering, and power efficiency for the same price. -
Cisco IOS/XE is objectively outdated and clunky compared to modern NOS.
The CLI is stuck in the 1990s, configuration is verbose and inconsistent, and bugs that have existed for a decade still linger. People argue that Junos, Arista EOS, or even Nvidia Cumulus Linux are cleaner and less error-prone. -
You’re mostly paying for the Cisco logo and support contract, not superior hardware.
Broadcom Trident/Tomahawk/Jericho ASICs power almost everyone (Cisco, Arista, Juniper, Dell, etc.). Once you strip away the software and brand, the silicon is identical or very similar, yet Cisco charges 3-5× more. -
Cisco’s “DNA Center” and subscription licensing (Smart Licensing/DNA Advantage) is a blatant cash grab.
Many engineers feel locked into recurring fees just to use basic features (OSPF, BGP, VXLAN) that used to be included forever in a “right-to-use” license. -
Catalyst 9000 series had an embarrassing amount of hardware defects and silent data corruption bugs.
Especially the early 9300/9500 stacks with field-notice issues (random reloads, QoS bugs, TCAM exhaustion, etc.) that took years to stabilize—yet Cisco marketed them as “intent-based networking revolution.” -
Cisco is losing the campus/enterprise race to cheaper, simpler competitors.
Brands like Extreme, HPE Aruba, Huawei, and even Ubiquiti Enterprise or TP-Link Omada are “good enough” for 90 % of SMB and campus deployments and cost a fraction. -
Cisco certification (CCNA/CCNP/CCIE) has become largely irrelevant for real-world switching jobs.
The exams still focus heavily on legacy IOS commands while most modern shops run Arista, Juniper, or SDN overlays. Many hiring managers now value hands-on experience with non-Cisco gear more. -
The Nexus 9000 in NX-OS mode is a dead-end product line.
ACI is the only “future” Cisco pushes, but ACI is overcomplicated and losing to VMware NSX, Arista CVP, or simple EVPN/VXLAN everywhere else.
These opinions are definitely unpopular inside Cisco partner ecosystems and training companies, but they’re increasingly common among engineers who have deployed multi-vendor networks in the last 5–10 years.