We performed a comparison between Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."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."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"It will allow me to integrate another system very quickly, as we continue expanding for our client."
"There are many valuable features of Cisco Meraki, including the switches, stacking, and layer 3 routing."
"It has good security with its Layer 7 protections."
"If you're trying to identify one of the switches or pinpoint a computer or pinpoint something, you could find it just like that and change the IP address. It's easiest to do it that way."
"The most valuable features are the multiple types of user groupings and access management."
"It's easy to manage and provides a clear network view, allowing efficient navigation down to the network details."
"The solution provides good coverage and identity management. Additionally, the user interface is straightforward."
"Cisco's technical support is very good and better than other vendors."
"It makes it easy to obtain all information about the client experience."
"The solution has been stable."
"They're very easy to set up and get running."
"We like that WatchGuard works and integrates directly with the firewalls we use."
"Cloud analytics that provide all its attributes."
"The Wi-Fi security features of this solution have been great for our customers who need to strictly control access to their network."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"It would be helpful to have even stronger security features to help protect against interference from other nearby access points that aren't part of our network."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The price could be better."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
"The solution is expensive."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"There is a processing limitation when you have multiple SSIDs, above three or four."
"Documentation could be improved, but everything else has been spot-on."
"If they could work on the Meraki firewall hardware, and add SSL decryption as well as more application control and deep packet inspection, that would be ideal."
"The solution's pricing could be improved."
"It is super expensive for what you get. I just wish it was less expensive."
"Its price should be reduced."
"The biggest pain point is that they limit you through firewall throughput. I understand why they do it, but that really grates me. For instance, for 450 Mbps throughput, you're looking at £800 for a router, whereas if you look at the one gig connection, for some of us are lucky enough to have a gig connection, you could almost be spending £3,000 for the option to have one gig connectivity. That's one of the pain points I've got. I don't mind paying for throughput, but I should at least have the option to be able to update that throughput, maybe through extra licensing or something else. It is crazy expensive to jump through to the next one."
"In a future release, they should offer a next-generation UTM, where you can manage all items and the network, and have it include a lot of security features like fingerprinting functionality."
"Inability to import a user with one click."
"If a client device had issues with authentication due to out of date browser or similar difficulties, it would be nice to have the ability to migrate the client onto the portal via one click."
"One of the things is if you buy it with a certain subscription, you can't easily change the subscription level."
"I don't think they're available at the best price."
"The solution can be scaled but it has limitations from my experience."
"The price of this solution needs to reviewed, as it is currently high enough to deter customers from trying it."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is ranked 4th in Wireless LAN with 115 reviews while WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi is ranked 24th in Wireless LAN with 6 reviews. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is rated 8.2, while WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN writes "Offers good mobility, stability and scalability ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi writes "A solution that offers excellent support and makes it easy to manage networks". Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti Wireless, Mist AI and Cloud and Cisco Wireless, whereas WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi is most compared with Ubiquiti WLAN, Aruba Instant, Ruckus Wireless and Aruba Wireless. See our Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. WatchGuard Secure Wi‑Fi 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.
