Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless are industry leaders, offering robust solutions for building and managing wireless networks. Users prefer the robust stability of Cisco Wireless after a longer setup process, while Aruba Wireless offers quicker deployment with seamless integration and strong security features. Cisco Wireless excels in performance and customization options, but needs improvement in range and connectivity. Consider your existing network infrastructure. If you heavily rely on Cisco products, Cisco Wireless might offer smoother integration.
The summary above is based on 64 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Wireless and Aruba Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The simplicity is great."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution is stable."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"Overall, it's a very strong solution."
"Aruba Wireless has been straightforward to set up."
"The network strength is good."
"Reasonably priced and great for small to medium size organizations."
"Scalability has been one of the easiest aspects of the Aruba Instant product line. As long as the models are compatible, you can simply connect it to your network and it will learn the settings from the other APs on the network and join the AP network."
"We were able to increase capacity very easily."
"It delivers constantly, there is no break in the internet using these devices. It also automatically gets connected when the internet comes back. Failure is very low."
"APs are very easy to configure to the network once they contact the controller."
"Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support."
"The stability is great. It's very reliable."
"The mobility that it provides is really helpful."
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"The integration with Cisco ISE is good, and together we use them to provide services."
"The solution is easy to use and its stable."
"Identity PSK helps save SSIDs."
"Device profiling allows us to have different policies applied by ISE to wireless clients."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Aruba’s poor performance and random upgrade issues caused too much time consuming maintenance and troubleshooting."
"Access point mounting options could be better."
"Sometimes the configuration is difficult."
"Better integration with equipment from other vendors would ease the deployment process in some cases."
"The solution's GUI for configuration could be better."
"I would like to be able to customize Captive Portals."
"They should have more support for implementing Aruba Wireless in Smart Cities and outdoor applications."
"We have an issue with the integration of Aruba Wireless with our LDAP servers."
"Cisco is costlier relative to other solutions."
"The licensing models need to be reviewed in some instances. Obviously Cisco's licensing models are quite challenging, and it can be costly."
"Assurance capabilities must be improved."
"This solution is very expensive, which means we often have to go for cheaper options instead."
"The security must be improved."
"They should introduce zero interference capabilities."
"The reporting tool in Cisco Wireless could improve. If I am trying to receive information about a client or user, it's cumbersome to retrieve the information on the controller system. If I'm trying to find out where a client's been, it's cumbersome. You need another tool for Historical logs, but it should be all in one."
"Requires a firewall body to improve security."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 146 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "The portal for centralized management and virtual controller for APs are very valuable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Huawei Wireless and Mist AI and Cloud, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Mist AI and Cloud and Omada Access Points. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless LAN reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
On the most basic level, Cisco Wireless can offer a rather straightforward initial setup. In the span of about three hours, the basic framework can be set up. Step-by-step instructions are available to ease the deployment of the Cisco wireless network. A small business will now be able to make use of this wireless product without being worried about having to make a massive investment of either time or resources. This peace of mind extends to the actual maintenance of the product as well. Cisco wireless’s network does not require very much in the way of maintenance. It does require occasional upgrades to keep it running smoothly, but other than that, a team tasked with maintaining it has very little to worry about. Organizations of all sizes will be able to benefit from both of these aspects of Cisco wireless’s design.
Cisco wireless provides a very robust service that will continue to run over long periods of time and under heavy usage. Furthermore, the teams that are responsible for assisting users and resolving any potential issues that may arise are highly professional. These are two additional features that make Cisco wireless a valuable product. The wireless service is capable of running for years without any real need for replacements to be made to the hardware.
Although no system is perfect, Cisco’s Wireless network shows that products can still be made to last. Long spans of time can pass without issues arising. When they do, Cisco’s technical support team is well-equipped to help handle it. They respond quickly to inquiries and they are extremely knowledgeable. They bring the kind of professionalism that one would hope to have in a product’s support team.
Aruba Wireless can support many devices and provide the features that one would expect for this type of product. It is relatively cheap when compared to other products like Cisco Wireless. For that relatively cheap price, Aruba offers hardware whose performance can match anything offered by its competitors. It advertises what it can do and follows through with its promises. It is also very easy to configure. However, they do not guide users in different industries through the best practices that they should be employing when using Aruba Wireless.
Conclusion
Cisco Wireless offers an effective service. In terms of cost it is more expensive than Aruba Wireless. They both have a lot to offer. The price tag might just be the deciding factor.
Aruba is our choice for our WIFI solution as Aruba has a lot of features that can do the same with Meraki.
Aruba is saving costs vs Meraki in a long time operation.