We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Ruckus Wireless based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: As competitors, Cisco Wireless and Ruckus Wireless come in at a close tie. Both products offer a really strong set of features. However, their pricing is where each stands out, with Cisco being more expensive and Ruckus being affordable. In addition, users of Ruckus Wireless report seeing an immediate ROI.
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The simplicity is great."
"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 artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"With Cisco Wireless we have DNA technology for the frequency in which it operates, so that in case of any frequency interference it can look for and switch to another frequency, where there no interference."
"The tool is mainly improving our productivity."
"Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support."
"The customer always feels confident with the solution because of its reliability."
"The stability of the solution is good."
"The ability to deploy wireless access points with templates."
"The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless is its exceptional performance and reliability. The signal is highly reliable. We have not received a single complaint in the past year, which is a marked improvement from our prior equipment."
"The product can scale."
"Good connection quality."
"In general, all implementations are standard and pretty straightforward."
"Ruckus Wireless is reliable. The most valuable features are BeamFlex technology, Wi-Fi 6, and channel management."
"What I like best about Ruckus Wireless is that it's a controller-based product, so it's easy to configure."
"Ruckus features a centralized architecture solution with ultrasound technology, which helps us with communication and roaming."
"Once we got it set up and configured we've had little issues and it's been relatively stable. We use it across all seven of our offices and they all have the exact same wifi setup so when I go into any office I can get on the network and access resources."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"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."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The solution is expensive."
"The solution could improve by having more advanced features, such as AI that is able to do diagnosis on the network or detect incorrect configurations and is able to tell you what is the recommended practice. Additionally, it would be a benefit to have smart antennas that are able to track your movement, Wi-Fi 6 support, better transfer rates, low latency, stronger signals that can penetrate thick walls, and zero packet losses."
"There are areas for improvement with Cisco Wireless, as well as with wireless technology in general. For instance, while Wi-Fi 6 offers significant advancements, some unresolved issues and quirks have delayed our migration to this standard."
"In Latin America, Cisco is very expensive in comparison to other technologies."
"The interface could be better."
"If they could offer better coverage, we'd be much happier."
"The security must be improved."
"Room for improvement wise, the wireless coverage of Cisco's equipment could be better for the price position. That is, I think that the radius for the coverage could be better to make it worth the price that we pay for it."
"The pricing of Brazil is very expensive. When you look at other options, they are much cheaper."
"I would like to see better mapping capability because it can be really difficult, especially if you are deploying on a remote island."
"While the Virtual SmartZone appliance has improved in the last few years, it isn’t without issue and the performance of the Web page leaves something to be desired."
"The solution isn't the cheapest option. However, you are getting a quality product."
"The product is very expensive."
"It would be better if there were more visibility on the cloud. We have some lack of visibility because of wireless interference, and you have to do some troubleshooting for the packet capture. They have a built-in packet capture, and we can monitor the application. You can see all things over the cloud. They also provide an on-premise solution, so they need to improve the on-premise version and ensure an output with more visibility. Live monitoring in a live environment should be good. What is happening with wireless is that the wireless client is not connected due to interference, and there should be a shield zone on their wireless cloud. If they give us more features on both Ruckus Cloud or on-premises, that will be best. Nowadays, security is more important for everyone using wireless technology. If they implement a little bit of reduction and prevention features for some packets on the wireless cloud, some features like web filtering and some prevention for blocking will be good for the network."
"Previously, we would need to purchase appliances every time but it caused our data centers to get filled. Ruckus now has cloud-based controllers. They resolved the issue we were having."
"The interface should be mobile friendly."
"They can improve the cloud portion. Other vendors have a cloud controller, and they can provide the same so that we can see everything."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 146 reviews while Ruckus Wireless is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 97 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Wireless is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless writes "Great wireless, good reliability, and excellent connectivity". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Mist AI and Cloud and Omada Access Points, whereas Ruckus Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN, ExtremeWireless and Omada Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Ruckus 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.
They both do a great job. But it depends on the application scenario.
For corporate environments probably Cisco will perform better not only because of Cisco Wi-Fi features but especially because you can be integrated with all Cisco infrastructure and manage it all.
In heavy-duty environments, like public hot-spot, stadiums, exhibition centers, etc, Ruckus should be considered. In this type of applications, pure Wi-Fi performance is more important than management features or security, and therefore, it could be the better choice.
If you care more about performance and stable communications, Ruckus Wireless is definitely better.
Ruckus Wireless APs have;
- Adaptive antenna technology (called BeamFlex). This technology analyzes different paths to reach the client and electronically turns itself to a directional antenna, choosing the path that gives the best performance to reach each specific client. If the client is mobile or if the environment changes (such as a warehouse) the selection of paths/direction also changes instantly.
Transmitting in a directional way allows a good Signal-to-Noise Ratio and also causes less interference for other nearby APs outside the path of the directional transmission.
- ChannelFly technology. This technology chooses the best channel based on performance rather than background scanning for noise.
- Polarization Diversity. This technology allows the clients not to lose signal strength when held at different angles (important for mobile devices such as tablets and telephones).
- Better receive sensitivity compared to the competitors.
All these features make Ruckus Wireless a better choice than any other competitor (better performance, better coverage area, more stable and surprise-free communication especially in not so easy conditions such as noise, too many clients, too much traffic).