@glennda: The issue with the v1910 is that it doesn't seem to want to talk to our existing switching infrastructure if VLANs are involved. Actually, it is more complicated than that. It worked fine until I made the v1910's web interface available on another VLAN. It became intermittent at that point. Upgrading the firmware on the v1910 introduced a weird certificate problem. (Firefox won't trust it and refuses to allow an exception.) I'm curious if the v1910 came along with the 3COM acquisition.
And more generally, just so I don't unduly bias someone against D-Link gear, I should say that we have generally been happy with their switches. We have about 24 DGS-1248T and 10 DGS-1210-48 switches in service. These are fairly low-end "web-smart" switches. Just basic features (VLANs, link-aggregation, 802.1x, etc.) accessible through a web interface. Other than the crappy link aggregation performance, the occasional lock up while messing with stuff over the web interface, and the fans needing to be replaced right around the end of the warranty period, we've had little to complain about. I'm hoping to keep most of them in service on the edge. (Of course, our networks are almost all edge. Not much of a core to speak of yet.) We've probably had to reboot switches three or four times since we started using them. Knock on wood, we've had no failed ports.
To put this in perspective: We do absolutely the opposite of over-building. It has mostly worked. Where it doesn't, we either suffer or find work-arounds. As an example, I've been replacing old Cisco routers with commodity rack-mount PCs running pfSense. It has worked very well for us. I'm also experimenting with building Linux routers/firewalls and have generally been very happy with the flexibility this brings at very small cost. When it comes to security (ie. firewalls), I actually feel strongly that one needs the source. Other than that, I'm not advocating what we do. Not at all. Our budget imposes this approach upon us.