Cisco ISE support is praised for expertise but criticized for slow responses and inconsistent quality, especially with complex issues.

{"quote":"Direct comparisons with Forescout reveal up to 30% to 40% difference in cost savings with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"5"}

{"quote":"For small setups and if the backend infrastructure is Cisco-based, Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is suitable. However, for large organizations with mixed infrastructure, other solutions should be considered.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"5"}

{"quote":"Simple issues can take 72 hours or more than six months for resolution with Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) technical support.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"2"}

{"quote":"Scalability is limited. Factors like architecture, business nature, and legal limitations such as GDPR affect it. I would rate it as four or five out of ten.","quality_score":"6","sentiment_score":"3"}

{"quote":"I would rate the stability as four out of ten for Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).","quality_score":"6","sentiment_score":"3"}

Cisco ISE enhances security by managing network access control, device policies, and integration with security tools for users and guests.

Cisco ISE is scalable for enterprises but requires proper design, planning, and hardware considerations for efficient deployment.

{"quote":"I would rate it four out of ten based on my experience from the last year.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"However, for large organizations with mixed infrastructure, other solutions should be considered.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"For small setups and if the backend infrastructure is Cisco-based, Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is suitable.","score":"7"}

Engage certified ISE integrators, ensure technical support, evaluate needs, and plan carefully for successful implementation and integration.

Cisco ISE provides robust network control, seamless Cisco integration, and enhances security with policy management, zero-trust, and BYOD support.

7.5

{"quote":"Direct comparisons with Forescout reveal up to 30% to 40% difference in cost savings.","score":"9"}

4.125

{"quote":"For enterprise customers, it comes at a lower cost and is comparatively cost-effective.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"The return on investment for Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is difficult to gauge due to complexities.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication. They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases.","quality_score":"9","sentiment_score":"2"}

Cisco ISE requires improved integration, usability, and performance, with enhanced features and efficiency for better user adoption and experience.

{"quote":"Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is very good at device administration.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"8"}

7.601273

Users have utilized Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) for varying durations, ranging from less than a year to over ten years.

1.0

2.9

3.4

Cisco Identity Services Engine improves security, simplifies operations, reduces costs, aids compliance, and integrates with systems for robust protection.

Cisco Identity Services Engine pricing is competitive but complex, with tiered licensing and additional costs potentially impacting smaller businesses.

Cisco Identity Services Engine is stable and reliable, with occasional update and scaling challenges, and generally effective support resolution.

Users chose Cisco ISE for integration and stability, while others preferred ClearPass for cost-effectiveness or user-friendliness.

Cisco ISE enhances security by simplifying access management, integrating with Active Directory, and centralizing authentication to optimize IT operations.

5.25

4.5

{"quote":"I would rate the stability as four out of ten.","score":"5"}

{"quote":"Authentication and NAC use cases do not.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"Device administration runs smoothly.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"The stability of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is poor for certain use cases, like authentication.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"I rate the technical support as one out of ten.","score":"10"}

{"quote":"Simple issues can take 72 hours or more than six months for resolution.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Resolving issues can take a long time.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"It heavily relies on a reactive approach.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"Technical support is poor.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"I would rate it as four or five out of ten.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"Factors like architecture, business nature, and legal limitations such as GDPR affect it.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Scalability is limited.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Additionally, the product is vulnerable and has many bugs.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Threat detection capabilities are very weak.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"This will give them a roadmap for software-defined access (SDA) use cases and network segmentation.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"They are very poor in asset classification and should focus on improving the preauthentication profiling, especially for NAC use cases.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) needs to improve the profiling preauthentication.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Making large organizational costs significant.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"For small organizations, it's effective - not for larger ones.","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Setup costs vary.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"Dedicated resources are needed due to the demanding nature of Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).","score":"8"}

{"quote":"Cloud solutions are expensive, while on-prem setups with shared environments are cheaper but not effective.","score":"9"}

{"quote":"For the wireless authentication and network access control (NAC) use cases, it is not a solid product because there are better products for NAC than Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE).","score":"8"}

{"quote":"This is one of the best features.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) is very good at device administration.","score":"9"}

I use Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) mainly for wireless authentication and device administration. While it excels in device administration, it falls short in network access control. It offers cost savings compared to Forescout but needs improvements in threat detection and profiling.

Users previously utilized systems like Microsoft IAS/NPS, Aruba ClearPass, Trustwave, Juniper NAC, FortiNAC, Portnox, Secure ACS, OpenRADIUS, and 3Com wireless controllers before Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE). Many switched to ISE for enhanced integration with Cisco's network, superior features, and ease of administration. Organizations indicated difficulties with previous tools or sought improved security and functionality, making Cisco ISE a preferred choice for unified management across their environments.

<p></p>

<p>Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers centralized access control, integrating with Cisco networking products and ensuring multifactor authentication. Supporting thousands of users, it uses network load balancers for scalability. Features include posture assessment, policy management, VLAN assignments, and BYOD services. Setup is straightforward but complex, with significant prerequisites. Initial integration may conclude in a month, yet the platform is prone to bugs and upgrade issues. Licensing is complex, while documentation lacks clarity.</p>

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) pricing features three tiers: Basic, Plus, and Apex. Users often find the cost high compared to competitors like Forescout or Fortinet, and licensing is complex with frequent changes. Large organizations may benefit from enterprise agreements, while smaller businesses face cost challenges. Subscription models have increased expenses, and additional costs for technical support and implementation can be significant. Despite the price concerns, ISE offers robust functionality and support.

<p>The learning curve is steep and the initial setup is complex.</p><p>Compliance and posture features do not always work reliably, causing stability issues.</p><p>Integration with third-party solutions could be improved, and compatibility with other vendors is limited.</p><p>Support services need enhancement and should be faster and more knowledgeable.</p><p>The upgrade process is challenging, time-consuming, and often problematic.</p>

Many implementers highlighted positive experiences with partners and consultants, with Cisco consultants often praised for expertise. Some faced challenges due to limited knowledge from integrators, requiring internal learning. Several deployed ISE using a mix of in-house teams and third-party support, with varying team sizes. Cisco partners are frequently involved, offering assistance and tooling adjustments. Deployment timelines varied, influenced by organizational infrastructure and adherence to guidelines. Maintenance typically involved dedicated staff for oversight.

Users report varied experiences with Cisco Identity Services Engine's initial setup. Some find it straightforward and quick, while others describe it as complex and time-consuming, requiring expert assistance. The complexity often depends on the environment, configuration, and features activated. Planning and network infrastructure play significant roles in deployment success. Experiences range from a few hours to several months, with challenges arising from configuration, integration, and policy implementation.

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) customer service and support receive mixed feedback. Many users find technical support responsive, knowledgeable, and capable of resolving issues promptly. Others highlight delays and difficulties in obtaining immediate solutions, particularly for complex cases or integrations. The partner ecosystem assists some users effectively. While dedication to resolving issues is appreciated, some users report lengthy wait times and a perceived lack of expertise in initial support interactions. Satisfaction levels vary significantly.

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) customer service and support is generally rated positively with a score ranging between 7 to 9 out of 10 based on feedback.

Cisco Identity Services Engine delivers positive returns demonstrated by enhanced security, simplified IT processes, prolonged equipment lifespan, and reduced downtime. Users experience cost-effectiveness through integration with existing security solutions and consolidated technology management, eliminating multiple service contracts. Clients appreciate increased operational confidence and fewer security issues. Compliance requirements and regulatory adherence reduce potential fines, while freed-up staff time allows focus on higher-value tasks, contributing to overall satisfaction and value.

The feedback indicates Microsoft Azure is frequently chosen for Cisco Identity Services Engine. Amazon Web Services is selected less often, with some participants opting for other providers.

A large majority of entities prefer deploying Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) on-premises. A smaller segment utilizes a hybrid cloud approach. Some adopt private cloud environments, while minimal numbers choose public cloud models.

Users advise others to plan thoroughly and use an accredited integrator for Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE). Understanding licensing and features is crucial. Technical knowledge is required, and tech support should be improved. Designing an effective deployment strategy is important for a successful implementation. Potential users should conduct proof of concept tests. Cisco ISE is complex but valuable, and organizations should evaluate their specific needs. It offers strong security capabilities but requires careful management and integration.

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) exhibits notable stability with minimal issues reported in various environments. Many users praise its reliability, though there are reports of instability, particularly with certain configurations or after updates. Feedback suggests that some users experience minor disruptions, but these are generally manageable. A significant portion of users appreciates its stable performance, especially after proper setup and tuning, while others note occasional challenges requiring technical support to resolve.

<p>Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers enhanced access control and security capabilities, providing multifactor authentication and secure management of devices and network changes.</p>
<p>It is scalable and supports a large number of users, facilitating network expansions and flexibility in user management.</p>
<p>Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) integrates well with other Cisco products and Microsoft products, ensuring a seamless networking experience across various hardware and software platforms.</p>
<p>Features like posture assessment, VLAN assignments, and guest access controls contribute to a robust policy and compliance framework.</p>
<p>Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) provides comprehensive visibility into network activities, offering granular control over access policies and enabling effective network management and security enforcement.</p>

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) requires easier TACACS integration to replace the ACS line, needs a more user-friendly and intuitive interface, and simpler deployment and upgrade processes. Many experience issues with stability, troubleshooting, documentation, and reporting. Integration with third-party products should be enhanced, and there should be better support for non-Mac devices. They suggest improvements in license management and increased scalability while ensuring more efficient resource usage.

Users have been utilizing Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) for approximately one to ten years.

Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) offers valuable features like its compatibility with 802.1X, TrustSec, guest portals, and profiling options. It integrates seamlessly with Cisco products, provides centralized access control, and offers posturing for device compliance. Its ease of integration with Active Directory and LDAP enhances authentication security, while its interface and automation improve user management. Profiling, scalability, and detailed device visibility empower organizations to effectively manage and safeguard their networks.

Companies use Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) primarily for network access control, authentication, and authorization. It aids in securing networks by managing device access, implementing zero trust policies, and segmenting users. ISE is applied in environments like corporate offices, educational institutions, and service providers to control wireless and wired connections, enforce policies for BYOD, and integrate with technologies like VPN and Active Directory for comprehensive network management and security.

Users generally find Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE) highly scalable. Although some tighter designs question its scalability, ISE can accommodate various environments. It effectively manages large user bases and offers adaptability to different architectures. Virtualization may present challenges, yet scalability is achieved through proper design and acquiring necessary licenses. Organizations have scaled ISE across multiple locations and thousands of endpoints, indicating its strong capacity for expansion compared to similar products.

Users considered Aruba ClearPass, ForeScout, Fortinet FortiNAC, Microsoft NPS, HPE RADIUS, and open-source solutions alongside Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE). Preference for ISE often stemmed from integration with Cisco's ecosystem and perceived reliability. ClearPass was noted for a better user interface but was seen as difficult to configure. Fortinet and ForeScout were options, though Cisco's alignment with existing infrastructure influenced decisions heavily. Cost and feature set were crucial in evaluations.

Cisco Identity Services Engine has enhanced organizational security for entities by strengthening network access control, improving authentication processes, and facilitating compliance with regulations. It integrates with existing systems for seamless device management, reduces operational overhead, and increases cyber resilience by restricting unauthorized access. It aids in managing guest access, supports the implementation of Zero Trust, and centralizes control over network resources, offering a streamlined approach to cybersecurity and infrastructure management across diverse environments.

Sparx Enterprise Architect is chosen for its cost-effectiveness, features, and usability over pricier or less intuitive alternatives.

Users evaluated options like Rational Doors, Rational Rose, MagicDraw, Orbus, Aris, Visio, BizzDesign, Archimate, MEGA HOPEX, Visual Paradigm, Sybase Power Designer, and Eclipse Modeling. They favored Sparx Systems Enterprise Architect due to its affordability and comprehensive features for UML modeling, finding other tools expensive or lacking ease of use or integration. Archimate support with Sparx was a key consideration for some users.

Users favored SailPoint for its performance and features over contenders like Aveksa, Oracle, Okta, and dismissed Broadcom and Dell.

Users explored Aveksa, Oracle, RSA, NetIQ, SAP, Saviynt, IBM, CA, Microsoft, Dell, ForgeRock, One Identity, Okta, Centrify, and EmpowerID. SailPoint Identity Security Cloud excelled in features like governance, time-to-market efficiency, and supporting both cloud and on-premises models. Compared to alternatives, it stood out in complex user access scenarios and offered a straightforward initial setup. Many found competing options less comprehensive, facing issues with performance, functionality, support, and pricing flexibility.

Users chose Cisco ISE for integration, stability, and features, favoring it over other options within a Cisco ecosystem.

Users explored various alternatives before choosing Cisco Identity Services Engine (ISE), including Aruba ClearPass, Fortinet FortiNAC, and Forescout. Many preferred ISE for its integration with existing Cisco infrastructure and its superior functionality. Some considered Aruba and Fortinet, yet found ISE to integrate better with their systems. They appreciated Cisco's robust support. While cost was a factor, ISE's compatibility and features often outweighed cheaper options. Many relied on Cisco's reputation and familiarity with their ecosystem.

Enterprises chose Ubiquiti UniFi Switches for cost-effectiveness, easy management, and user-friendly interface over complex alternatives like Cisco.

Ubiquiti UniFi Switches are quickly deployed by one network engineer, with ease and expertise enhancing configuration and management.

Organizations prefer Ubiquiti UniFi Switches on-premises for security, using hybrid cloud for flexibility; public cloud adoption is minimal.

Ubiquiti UniFi Switches offer flexible setup, varying in complexity, with strong community support despite occasional configuration challenges.

Ubiquiti UniFi Switches' customer service is inconsistent, making many users rely on community forums for effective support.

{"quote":"Overall, I rate Ubiquiti UniFi switches nine out of ten.","score":"6"}

{"quote":"However, without evaluating other products, they may not be suitable for large companies.","score":"7"}

{"quote":"I would recommend Ubiquiti UniFi switches to others, especially for smaller environments.","score":"8"}

Ubiquiti UniFi Switches boost network capabilities with PoE, facilitating connectivity in educational, office, and small business environments.

{"quote":"While we are satisfied with its use in small environments, other products may be needed in very large companies with more than 30 users.","quality_score":"6","sentiment_score":"7"}

{"quote":"They are suitable for environments with around ten to 20 people.","quality_score":"7","sentiment_score":"8"}

{"quote":"I would like to see improvements in their PBX-related features. The current setup is closed and does not allow for integration with non-Ubiquiti VoIP devices or providers outside their ecosystem.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"3"}

{"quote":"I would recommend Ubiquiti UniFi switches to others, especially for smaller environments.","quality_score":"8","sentiment_score":"9"}