Meter vs. the traditional way DIY, Service Integrator, or MSP - here's how they actually compare.
Most companies end up on one of three paths for networking. None of them are wrong - but it's worth knowing what you're actually trading off before you commit to one.
| DIY | Integrator + Hardware Vendor | Traditional MSP | Meter | |
| Who owns the hardware | You | You | Usually you | Meter |
| Upfront capital cost | High | High | High | None (subscription) |
| Who's accountable when something breaks | Your team | Split between vendors | The MSP, within their scope | Meter, end-to-end |
| Visibility across sites | Manual, if it exists | Fragmented | Depends on tooling | Single dashboard |
| Time to resolve an issue | Depends on internal capacity | Often slow - requires vendor coordination | Faster, but scoped to their remit | Proactive monitoring, often resolved before you notice |
| Scaling to a new site | Rebuild from scratch | Renegotiate contracts | Re-scope engagement | Same model, new location |
| Pricing predictability | Low - capex spikes | Low | Medium | High - flat monthly fee |
An honest note on when Meter isn't the obvious choice If you're a single small office with minimal networking needs and no plans to grow, a lighter DIY setup or a MSP contract may genuinely be cheaper and simpler. Meter's model earns its value at the point where multi-site management, uptime accountability, or vendor-juggling actually start costing you time. We'd rather be honest and put that out there rather than pretending one model fits everyone.
The underlying difference DIY, Service Integrator, and MSPs all split ownership of your network across multiple parties in different ways. Meter collapses hardware, software, and connectivity into one company, on one bill, with one team accountable for the outcome.
Book in a demo to see how it could work for your company →