Aruba Access Points Reviews

I'm familiar with Aruba Access Points, particularly with access points. I'm not very experienced with the CX series yet, but I'm well-versed with Aruba's previous product lines.

I have been working with Aruba Access Points for approximately eight years, since the 100 series came into line.

I have worked for a value-added reseller, where we sold Aruba Access Points and configured and supported them on-site.

The integration with Aruba Central's cloud-native management solution is straightforward. The service itself is excellent using the user portal but the licensing should be included in the pricing of the device. The new cloud-based approach should just not cut off the Instant AP functionality.

I have tried these Cloud Central solutions, but for the same reason, nobody wants to pay for it. They don't want to go for it. They may not consider choosing 700 series over the competitors because it is only mandatory to register them in Aruba Central. I suspect that for our customers in Estonia and this region, they tend to look toward other players, such as Ubiquiti.

The most valuable features I find in Aruba Access Points include the ability to operate independently from cloud services. This is most important for us because we have small companies here, and they want to have all IT inside of their house.

As I already mentioned, the ability to stay with self-hosting solutions for central management is what I think could be improved about Aruba Access Points. If this becomes available in the future, I think it should change the game. However, I don't currently see this because I see nothing about AirWave anymore on your roadmap. I don't understand what happens next.

There are some problems in assessing the performance of Aruba Access Points in environments with high user density. If there is a dense environment, a mobility controller would be the one you should go with because this needs more telemetry to calculate. I suspect this will be easier to do with local administration or local management because if everything goes over the internet through Aruba Central, it takes time. Every decision the central management makes takes extra latency to send over to the local area network. I think this is not a good approach to move to central management that is hosted somewhere far away. It should still retain the functionality to use Instant AP functionality that is available until 500 and maybe 600 as well. If you go to software version 10 and future versions, then you lose this functionality and you can't go back anymore.

It would be good to assist with local location management and BLE-based functionalities as additional features I expect from future Aruba Access Points. There were some attempts to support third-party integrations through cooperation between Aruba and Meridian. However, I don't understand what happened there, and nothing is clear in this area. IoT will also be very important for people. You should add functionality to the platform that will support third-party IoT devices.

I have been working with Aruba Access Points since 2009 where the 100 series came into line.

The only thing the customers need is that wireless communications work stably. The stability of this connectivity is what they are most interested in.

If everything goes over the internet through Aruba Central, it takes time. Every decision the central management makes takes extra latency to send over to the local area network. I think this is not a good approach to move to central management that is hosted somewhere far away. It should still retain the functionality to use Instant AP functionality that is available until 500 and maybe 600 as well. If you go to software version 10 and future versions, then you lose this functionality and you can't go back anymore.

Customer service rating: 6 out of 10.

Neutral

The pricing and licensing model for Aruba Access Points is something we can cope with. If it is licensing, which AirWave was about €100 per device as a one-time price, we can live with that. It is acceptable; it was not very cheap, but it was acceptable, and we can tell our customers, 'This is a good solution and you should pay this once and you have this solution forever.' We have several customers who still use AirWave.

As I mentioned before, competitors including Ubiquiti are options. The robustness of AirWave was also very good. I think this is not a good approach to move to central management that is hosted somewhere far away. It should still retain the functionality to use Instant AP functionality that is available until 500 and maybe 600 as well. If you go to software version 10 and future versions, then you lose this functionality and you can't go back anymore.

I'm very pleased with Aruba Access Points. I'm even using Aruba's 500 series at my home, so I'm very pleased with it.

To be honest, I must consider dealing with Ubiquiti because we have some tenders here and competitors go to the tenders using Ubiquiti products. We should rather offer Ubiquiti in the first place now because of the price. It has nothing to do with whether the product is good or not; the price is everything right now.

I would rate this review a 9 out of 10.

They normally use Aruba Access Points for building, establishing, and deploying in-house wireless networks. Some customers ask for outdoor access points when they want to connect different sites and buildings. This is a rare case, but sometimes customers ask for such solutions.

It depends upon specific industries. For banking, we work with Aruba Access Points, and for enterprises and home networks where customers have significant demands, we can propose the Aruba solution.

Aruba Access Points are technologically advanced. Price-wise, they are cheaper than Cisco and other options. Our market is very price-conscious, so we normally work with Aruba in general.

Feature-wise, they are technically strong, but the main point is the price point, which is very important for proposing, developing, and establishing a solution.

Regarding scalability, users can implement many types of access points and increase their quantity. When using the controller-based solution, scalability is readily available.

The main advantage is the flexibility of usage and comfortability. Users can build networks on Aruba Access Points, and the price is very comparable with other products. The feature set is good enough. Aruba Wi-Fi 6 is available in the market, but it is not generally required because it is costlier than traditional Wi-Fi 4 and 5.

AI is a buzzword here without substance. In a practical sense, nobody is working with AI or willing to work with AI features.

Everyone discusses AI, but for providing wireless access to users, AI only plays its part when analytics are needed. We do not have customers who are willing to implement the analytics part of wireless solutions.

Currently, there are no specific improvements needed. The existing technologies are sufficient for our needs. Perhaps in the future, AI could be an add-on, but currently, we do not require anything additional.

I have been working with this organization for approximately 25 years.

Unless there is a fault in the access point, we do not face any problems. The failure rate is very rare.

For high-density environments, when we propose solutions for enterprise and small business, the required number of access points is understood. Scalability and expandability are adjusted from day one based on expansion and growth projections. We do not work with large organizations requiring 500 or 600 APs deployment.

Tech support is normally required when we encounter problems. Because we work with different HP products, such as servers, storage, and high-end switches, technical assistance is only needed when there are issues on the compute side. For the network part, we rarely require support.

Positive

ROI is good because we do not work with AI features. We simply provide solutions for connectivity. This is why we do not require technical support, as the solution remains simple without AI implementation.

Our main priority and focus is Aruba Access Points. If customers are not willing to use Aruba, we offer other solutions such as Cisco or Juniper.

We work with various products including Cisco products, Aruba Access Points, Fortinet, Barracuda, and Kemp Progress.

For Cisco, we work with data center switching, Nexus, telephony, access switches, routers, and access points. We work with Catalyst but not specifically SD-WAN, as the SD-WAN market is not active in our region.

For Aruba products, we focus on switching and wireless parts, specifically APs. We begin with site surveys, obtain building maps, and create heat maps. Based on these heat maps, we propose models and prepare BOQs.

The main advantage of Aruba Access Points is their on-premises controllers. Juniper Mist and Cisco Meraki provide cloud controllers, but cloud solutions are not popular in our region. Customers prefer on-premises environments.

The solution is not complex but rather user-friendly and easy to use. Even without a controller, small networks can be established for SMB environments.

I would rate Aruba Access Points seven out of seven points because it performs excellently.

We usually recommend Aruba Access Points for places such as corporate houses, production facilities, factories, and office environments.

Aruba Access Points have better coverage, particularly area coverage, than Forti.

Aruba Access Points provide further coverage, more coverage, with better throughput and signal strength.

My only recommendation for Aruba Access Points would be better marketing and better promotion, specifically for this region.

I haven't deployed many Aruba Access Points because one of my colleagues is responsible for Aruba, while my part focuses on Cisco and Fortinet.

I haven't had a chance to get Aruba support, and while I have coordination with Forti and their TAC, I haven't had any opportunity to speak with any Aruba or HP TAC.

Neutral

When comparing pricing between Aruba Access Points and Forti, I find Aruba to be on the higher side.

We are working with Cisco, Huawei, and Ruckus, but the most competitive wireless products are Cisco, Huawei, Forti, and Aruba.

HP markets their compute very effectively but hasn't marketed the network or wireless part effectively in this market.

Based on performance, compute volume, and appearance, I believe Forti is relatively new in this market and is growing, whereas HP offers a more mature product.

In terms of access points, Aruba Access Points are much higher than Forti.

We are partners and resellers of both Fortinet and HP, and as system integrators, we resell products and deploy based on customer requirements, which varies by customer. Some customers have the limitation that they won't buy any product other than Cisco, while elsewhere we may have challenges with deploying Cisco due to internal issues.

Even though I've been familiar with Aruba Access Points, my product portfolio for Aruba is limited because I support some aspects of it, but deployment is managed by one of my other colleagues who oversees Aruba and Ubiquiti.

If I'm specifically talking about Pakistan, I believe Forti is doing better marketing than Aruba, as Aruba Access Points are mostly deployed based on corporate requirements, not by customer's choice, because they didn't educate properly in this market.

Based on customer requirements and environment, I would rate Aruba Access Points seven out of ten.

To be honest, I don't know the specific use case because I only look after the Wi-Fi. My specialization is Wi-Fi.

I work with thousands and thousands of devices connected to Aruba Access Points.

Aruba Access Points are working perfectly for video conferences, IoT deployment, and similar applications.

I appreciate the CLI of Aruba Access Points. The CLI is very complete, with lots of commands and is very granular.

We do implement role-based access control and integrated firewalls in Aruba Access Points.

For performance, I would rate Aruba Access Points an eight.

Aruba Access Points support Wi-Fi 6.

It is relatively easy to deploy Aruba Access Points, so from the box to operation is straightforward. In a few minutes, it is up and running.

AI is only in Aruba Central, and we don't use Aruba Central yet.

Integrating AI in the controller would be a good point for improvement.

Performance is an area that could be improved and represents a gap for enhancement.

There are sometimes firmware issues with Aruba Access Points.

I have been using this solution since 2019.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Access Points as nine.

I would rate the scalability of Aruba Access Points as eight.

My rating for Aruba technical support would be seven.

When you open a ticket, they ask you lots of questions, so many questions that sometimes you feel it's not worth opening a ticket. It takes too much time.

Juniper Mist is the best option, but Aruba bought Juniper Mist, so they are now the same company.

Juniper Mist is much better than Aruba.

It is relatively easy to deploy Aruba Access Points, so from the box to operation is straightforward. In a few minutes, it is up and running.

I purchased the product through a partner.

I obtained it from a distributor, my local partner.

I would rate the price for the product as two, with one being high and ten being low.

Aruba Access Points work fine with another product called ClearPass.

I integrated it with the Access Point.

Overall, I would give a final rating of eight for Aruba Access Points.

I would recommend Aruba Access Points to other users. My overall review rating for this product is eight.

Currently, my primary focus is on Zero Trust Network Access (ZTNA) technology. However, when it comes to wireless LAN access points, I specifically work with Instant On Access Points, models AP11 and AP21, from HP Aruba. I primarily recommend Aruba access points to small banking sectors, healthcare, and the SME segment, particularly SOHO and small and medium enterprises.

One of the most valued aspects of Aruba access points is their price competitiveness; they are available at half the price of Juniper access points. 

Additionally, they do not require any kind of license for implementation. Despite this, many customers have their own firewall, and they can control everything from their firewall, ensuring flexibility. 

Furthermore, the ease of management with Aruba access points enables customers to connect them directly to their network via a PoE switch and manage them remotely from mobile devices.

I would like Aruba to provide integration capabilities for Microsoft Entra ID, Azure Directory, or other identity verification engines like Okta, Google Identity, or Ping Identity. It is important that the access points come with cloud identity engines to improve integration with network infrastructures.

I have been working with Aruba access points for the last year.

People tend to purchase no more than five access points per entity. Despite this limitation, Aruba access points integrate well with existing networks via PoE switches.

Technical support for Aruba access points in India is very good. For technical support alone, I would give them a score of nine out of ten.

Positive

I usually prefer HP Aruba or Cambium Networks when it comes to wireless solutions due to their pricing. For switches, I am dedicated to using Juniper.

I have not sold any Aruba Central management solutions to customers. The customers we work with use basic access points such as the Instant On series and not the high-end series.

Due to its pricing, Aruba access points provide good value. They are priced at half the rate of Juniper access points for basic models.

Besides Juniper, I also engage with Aruba and HP solutions.

Regarding overall satisfaction, while I am content with the support received and the product's affordability, the capability to integrate with identity providers like Microsoft Azure Directory or Azure Entra ID is still desired. 

Therefore, I rate the Aruba access points, particularly the Instant On series, eight out of ten. Currently, I am focused on Aruba and Juniper solutions.

Our customers are hotels, and the company I worked for provides turnkey solutions for these hotels. Our work starts with infrastructure, implementing passive and copper cabling, followed by active components like switches and controllers. 

On top of that, we provide hospitality solutions, including Opera and Materials Control, primarily focusing on Opera.

We provide a full range of applications that operate the hotel, like front office applications, back office applications, and interfaces between systems.

It is a reliable solution with good coverage. We receive support from Aruba, with assistance from the country manager in providing better quotations and support for projects. 

We did not face any critical problems with the hardware or any of the devices. It is very reliable, and the cost of the hardware is not much compared to Cisco and other products.

Some customers comment that the shape and size of the access point is a little big, especially the one installed in the guest room. Other than that, nothing specific in terms of improvements comes to mind.

I have been working with Aruba Access Points for four or five years, with the most recent experience being six months ago.

It's a very reliable solution. I didn't face any serious issues while handing over projects to customers.

While scaling up to five hundred users, it may cause some performance issues.

Technical support is available through companies in Egypt, providing varying degrees of support. A company called ACT is very good at support. Aruba's country manager is very responsive and supportive.

Positive

I do not have experience working with other wireless LAN products apart from Aruba. I have researched Huawei for a friend, comparing costs with Aruba.

The setup of access points takes minor time in the overall project. Most of the effort is in extending UDP and fiber cables. Configuration is done through a controller, taking about five minutes for each access point.

We manage the project, and I have a technical team that goes into deep technical details.

Here, many owners look at the lump sum figure of the deal, comparing overall costs. Our company contacts Aruba's country manager for extra discounts to secure deals. The pricing is reasonable and lower than competitors.

I researched Huawei to compare with Aruba upon request. The comparison was based on reducing project costs.

Aruba Access Points are reliable and easy to implement. Support from Aruba is quick, unlike Ruckus or Cisco, which take more time.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case for Aruba Access Points is WiFi connectivity, including 802.1x authentication, guest authentication, and security posture assessment for endpoints.

We found that with Aruba, we can operate more efficiently, achieving good results in terms of HR and time savings.

We appreciate the guest authentication, guest portal, and 802.1x authentication. The integration with robust network switches is valuable. The solution is robust and stable, and we do not experience any downtime.

Since we are in health care, it would be beneficial to have enhanced security features around medical devices and IoT, especially for improving the visibility of medical devices within the WiFi network.

We have been using Aruba for three or four years now.

The solution is stable, and we do not experience any downtimes.

The solution is scalable since it is cloud-based, and scalability is not a concern.

We are happy with the support level, both with the on-ground teams and the service provided by HP.

Positive

We have used other solutions as well, such as Cisco Meraki and some Chinese OEMs.

The initial setup is straightforward, and time-wise, it is convenient.

Our in-house teams are capable enough, and they handle the maintenance effectively.

We achieved good results in operation efficiency, particularly in terms of HR and time savings. However, it has not been exactly quantified in terms of ROI or TCO.

The solution is not cheap per se, yet the overall value proposition is moderate. It is not very expensive or very cheap.

We evaluated solutions like Cisco Meraki and products from Chinese OEMs.

We recommend enhancements in security features, particularly for medical devices and IoT within healthcare facilities.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is to provide public Wi-Fi services initiated by the government. This includes deploying the solution in both indoor and outdoor venues. We demonstrate the use and speed of Wi-Fi 6E access points as part of this initiative.

The controller software, which can control multiple access points remotely, is very convenient. It makes the provisioning process simple and efficient. The controller comes in two models: a local controller and a cloud-based one.

There should be enhancements to support open Wi-Fi technology for seamless authentication across different access points.

I have used the solution for about five years.

The stability of the Aruba Access Points is quite high. I would rate it at a nine out of ten.

The scalability of the Aruba Access Points is excellent. I would also rate it at a nine out of ten.

Technical support is generally good. However, it depends on whether it is handled by the company's engineer or the agent engineer. I would rate the support as eight.

Positive

Before Aruba Access Points, we used Lucas APs. Currently, we use both Aruba and Lucas, with the majority being Lucas. We sought out Aruba for their latest Wi-Fi 6E version.

The setup is straightforward and user-friendly. I would rate it almost as a nine, indicating it's fairly easy.

We considered Lucas and domestic products alongside Aruba.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use Aruba Access Points as a Wi-Fi access point for office users. The solution supports our Wi-Fi needs very well. You can connect several users and laptops to it. Also, the guest Wi-Fi access can be managed centrally by Aruba Central.

The solution's support, stability, scalability, and good redundancy features are beneficial for our network management. The solution supports all the authentication features available in the market. It also has a good dashboard and GUI.

The solution should be made more robust. Aruba can come up with more models or standards much earlier.

I have been using Aruba Access Points for six years.

Aruba Access Points is a stable solution.

I rate the solution ten out of ten for stability.

Aruba Access Points is an easily scalable solution. You need to buy APs, take up the licenses, and add them. Around 4,000 users are using the solution extensively in our organization, and we have plans to increase the usage.

I rate Aruba Access Points ten out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is very good. They are setting up a good standard in the industry.

The solution’s initial setup is straightforward.

We implemented the solution through an in-house team. The solution's deployment time depends on the offices. You can deploy the solution for a medium-sized data center in two or three days with the mounting.

You need to mount all the APs and then connect them back to the central switch. You also need to add them to the Aruba Central API group that you have configured with the settings. It automatically takes a leader or the main access points. From there, it should be good to go.

The solution gives you a good Wi-Fi solution for all your endpoints, like laptops, robotic devices, and mobile devices. It also gives you guest access, which is restricted very well.

Users have to pay a yearly subscription for Aruba Access Points. The solution's pricing is nominal and not as costly as Cisco's. It's not cheap, but it is not too expensive either.

On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a seven out of ten.

We don't have a use case where the solution supports remote users. The solution does a good job for the mobile clients.

The security aspect of Aruba Access Points has done a good job of protecting our network against threats. We can configure the guest Wi-Fi with their landing page portal as well. That's a pretty easy setup where we don't need to deploy anything in-house or locally or take a cloud subscription. Security-wise, the solution is good, and you get many features that can be implemented to safeguard your environment.

Around 78 people, including managers and engineers, would be required to deploy and maintain the solution for 4,000 people in around 50 offices. I recommend Aruba Access Points to other users. The solution is scalable, easy to deploy, and provides really good technical support. The solution's failure rate is lower, and the redundancy works well.

The solution's reliability is really good. The failover mechanism works well. The coverage is also good, so we don't need to worry much about its reliability.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

We are using the solution for endpoint connectivity.

The manageability of both on-premise and cloud versions is valuable.

The licensing models lack clarity. Salespeople from Aruba were not able to explain it to me. Different people gave me different opinions. I can see the total bandwidth, but I cannot see the internal bandwidth.

I have been using the solution for the last six months.

The stability is good. I do not find any issues with it. I rate the stability a ten out of ten.

The tool has very good scalability. I rate the scalability a ten out of ten. The number of users depends upon the location. Some locations have 200 access points, while others have 50. The solution is used 24/7.

We also use Meraki. I can control the bandwidth with Meraki, but I can’t do it with Aruba. The choice of the product depends on the existing configurations and requirements. Meraki has advanced features.

I rate the ease of setup a seven to eight out of ten.

The deployment was done with the help of vendors.

The TCO is good. The product works well.

I do not understand the difference between Foundation licenses and Advanced licenses. Aruba is neither cheap nor expensive. The tool is priced the same as its competitors.

I was told I'd receive immediate support if I had an advanced license. Overall, I rate the solution a seven to eight out of ten.