We performed a comparison between Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Ruckus Wireless WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The feature that I really liked is the mesh feature. Currently, we are in quarantine, and the request of home users is that they need to cover the whole house or the whole indoor house. Mesh solution works really nice in Cambium environment. Being able to set up access points in advance is a good feature. It lets you set up the whole environment in your lab or any other place before deploying the access points."
"The product's scalability features are good."
"The most valuable features for network performance in the solution are reliability and centralized management through a single controller."
"It is a stable solution."
"The most valuable features of Cambium Networks Wireless WAN are cloud management and links."
"What I find valuable is the fact that you don't need to purchase any license. Basically you just get the hardware for the access points, configure an IP and connect it with a switch."
"It excels in challenging environments and adverse weather conditions, maintaining high performance without any impact on the link quality."
"The initial setup of Cambium is straightforward."
"The feature I like most, is the product activity."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the size of the outdoor access points. It's great and you can disguise them quite well."
"The solution can scale well."
"It’s reliable."
"Radio management is a valuable feature of the solution."
"The solution is easy to use and offers good management for wireless."
"The initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN is very easy."
"It's highly scalable as long as the licenses are in place. You can expand it easily."
"If someone wants to go to the location-based portal of the product, like the one available in Meraki, it would not be possible, and it is an area that needs improvement."
"The Cambium user interface and configuration should be improved."
"Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is stable but sometimes the 2.4 gigahertz network is sometimes not as stable as the 5 gigahertz. The 5 gigahertz works smoothly with everything, but 2.4 has some problems. If we change the configuration I am not sure if it would fix the problem."
"If they could move from the fixed wireless point to mobile, it will make a big change in the market. The cnPilot coverage should be covering big spaces. It should also have an external antenna, not a built-in antenna."
"Cambium Networks Wireless WAN's support services could be better."
"The Wifi coverage and throughput performance of Cambium could improve."
"Cambium Networks Wireless WAN could improve by providing a better signal range."
"The modulation could be optimized for better performance, and the configuration should be made adaptive to ensure dynamic adjustments as needed."
"I believe there is room for improvement in the price structure."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN we have a lot of component shortages in the world. This has impacted deliveries. We have large back orders of the solution."
"The pricing of Ruckus Wireless WAN is an area of concern. Ruckus Wireless WAN should slash its current price to match the prices offered by its competitors."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
"The solution could use a better user interface."
"The documentation they do have is very difficult to understand. There should be some scenarios, deployments, complications, or techniques to follow. They are inadequate in that regard, and the documentation needs to be greatly improved."
"Really, it's just about centralizing manageability across multiple sites, but like I said, that's me commenting on the old product that we've got. I know they've addressed that now with cloud controllers, but that would've been my main thing."
"I would like to see the billing system improved by adding a billing system integration."
More Cambium Networks Wireless WAN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 3rd in Wireless WAN with 24 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews. Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.6, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cambium Networks Wireless WAN writes "Provides point-to-point and point-to-multipoint connectivity and user-friendly solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless, Cisco Wireless WAN and Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless. See our Cambium Networks Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.