Aruba Instant On Access Points Reviews

My clients mostly request Aruba Instant On Access Points for use cases involving IoT utilization, bandwidth utilization, and user interference monitoring. All products are monitored from HP Aruba Central, where AI features are also available, allowing modification and correction with the use of AI tools in HP Aruba Central portfolio.

The key functions of Aruba Instant On Access Points include bandwidth management, user management, and high availability. They offer Zero Trust security, making them reliable and preventing failures. We have implemented approximately 300 plus devices on one premise without receiving any complaints about malfunctioning or functionality errors; it runs smoothly.

In contrast, I have faced many issues with Cisco products where we frequently depend on Cisco engineers for day-to-day operations and modifications of the configuration.

I believe that software usability could be improved.

I have been working with Cisco WireWorks for the last five to six years.

I have not touched Cisco recently because for the last one and a half years, I have been working with HP Aruba Central, so I do not have much experience at the moment. However, I was very much impressed and used to work with Cisco products and Cisco WireWorks before.

The initial setup for Aruba Instant On Access Points is simple, with no challenges.

People are mostly switching over to other brands as Ray has also been launched.

Neutral

Because I was previously certified with Cisco CCNA and CCNP, I have found the functions and features of Cisco WireWorks very valuable as I am interested in the configurations and all Cisco technology parts.

The initial setup for Aruba Instant On Access Points is simple, with no challenges.

Recently, we have implemented one of the biggest projects in India, specifically the Surat Diamond Bourse, which is the world's largest commercial trade center for natural diamonds. That project will be implemented on HP Aruba.

When comparing pricing with Cisco, Aruba Instant On Access Points are competitively priced, making them affordable solutions for SMBs, rather than being higher priced.

To be frank, the main requirements for Cisco WireWorks for my clients, is that I am also exploring HP Aruba Enterprise solutions, which is similar to this solution. Wherever it is required, we can also pitch HP Aruba instead of Cisco WireWorks because Cisco WireWorks is quite costlier as demanding software.

I have been working with Aruba Instant On Access Points for the last five years, implementing the HP Enterprise series grade Wi-Fi in the Surat Diamond Bourse.

HP Aruba is easily available in the India market, so sometimes customers are preferring the HP Aruba Central solution.

When we talk about Cisco WireWorks, my thoughts about Advanced Threat Detection indicate that Cisco needs to improve the visibility of its products in the India market, as there is very much less visibility right now.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Instant On Access Points as the best one. Overall, I rate Aruba Instant On Access Points eight out of ten, as Aruba is a most versatile solution. I can definitely recommend Aruba Instant On Access Points to others.

Neutral

The first step I normally use to install my network devices, in this case, Aruba Instant On Access Points, is to upgrade them to the best available. The second one is the configuration of the network IT management. The VLAN and mining areas ensure it is steady, and then I do some tests, and finally, I do the implementation.

In my company, we use Aruba Instant On Access Points with one or two other switches. The first tool I am implementing in the Mexico region is HPE Aruba Networking CX 6100 Switch Series.

The performance of the tool is the same as all other solutions. The difference between other tools and Aruba Instant On Access Points revolves around the costs. We don't have some differences between other tools and Aruba Instant On Access Points since our operation unit is not demanding.

I don't see much of a difference between Aruba and Cisco. With Aruba, the documentation on the website is not too easy to use, and some information is not found. I have to say that Cisco is very good in the documentation and the support offered to users, making it much better than Aruba.

I have experience with Aruba Instant On Access Points.

At the moment, the scalability is enough.

We have some plans to increase its usage. We are growing, and we have to implement more more devices.

We are in the process of migration. We have a lot of devices from Cisco, and we have to shift to Aruba. We are looking for new business units, and in those places, we will implement all the infrastructure with Aruba.

In the Mexico region, it is around 1015, and in the USA, there are around 300 people.

The solution's technical support is too slow. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I was working on the on-premises solutions, like IronNet, Aironet, and some other tools from Cisco, but not with Meraki. The last Aironet model that we have here in Mexico, in the corporate office, and in some of the other regions of Mexico is Cisco Aironet 3700 and Cisco Aironet 3800, so it is just two or three devices. Aruba Instant On Access Points was working with Aruba 2540 and Cisco 3850

In Cisco, I found some issues. I was working well with a vendor. I was working with Cisco Catalyst 9200 and Cisco Catalyst 9300, along with Cisco Catalyst 2916M XL Switch. With all devices, we got a report. During the immigration, we choose another vendor, which Aruba. We have some issues with Aruba Instant On Access Points in iOS that are targeting the devices, and I have seen some problems with the DHCP solution.

The product's initial setup phase is too easy.

Speaking about the strategies required for the deployment of the solution, I would say that the tool is used for some of the internal processes in our company. I do some of the designing of the solution, do a test and then work with the design I created. I then do the implementation, but in the current scenario, for the internal process in the company, the implementation is mostly done by the vendors.

The solution is deployed on an on-premises model.

The solution can be deployed in 20 minutes.

The product's price falls on the cheaper end of the spectrum. The price of the product is one of the biggest benefits that it offers.

In the enterprise, we are migrating to Aruba's vendor from Cisco. At the moment, we are migrating all the devices and network technology to Aruba in Germany.

I am using the product in some places. I currently use two technology since we are in the process of migration in our company. We use products from Cisco and Aruba.

The model of the device we use is for a warehouse. Currently, we use Aruba AP-565 Outdoor Access Points.

The product's maintenance part is okay. It doesn't need many resources. The implementation part of the product is too easy. The upgrades to the product are easy to manage. Two weeks ago, I saw some global-level upgrades to the product theory in our company, which were applicable to South Africa, Mexico, Italy, the USA, and all over the world where Aruba Instant On Access Points are used. I did not see any issues during the upgrade process.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

Our primary use case is managing switches and access points, particularly for wireless connectivity with both instant access points and cloud-controlled access points.

Aruba Instant On Access Points have improved our organization as we don't have to handle as many problems with these access points compared to FortiAP or Cisco access points.

The virtual controller feature is very beneficial because it removes the need for a physical controller. Additionally, advanced radio management is a valuable feature.

The security aspect needs improvement. There is not enough focus on security across networking vendors, and they often add features without testing them thoroughly. The AI capabilities are generalized and not significantly helpful. The technical support is also not very strong as they have faced similar issues as before.

The technical support from Aruba is a bit more competent compared to Fortinet. However, there are still issues with the language barrier and the overall quality of support.

Positive

We used Cisco access points before. We found Aruba Instant On Access Points to be better. Aruba's products are actually cheaper and feature advanced radio management, which works very well.

The pricing of Aruba Instant On Access Points is competitive compared to Cisco, and they are actually cheaper.

We evaluated solutions from Aruba and Fortinet. Currently, we are looking at Aruba and Keyao products.

I would recommend Aruba Instant On Access Points to others. If I had to choose, I would rate them as number one out of all access points.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

I am responsible for meeting customer expectations with the most appropriate IT solutions. I provide equipment recommendations based on customer needs and availability. Additionally, I have worked with Aruba access points, among other equipment.

My role involves distinguishing the best products for customer requirements, considering cost and power consumption. Aruba is reliable, which aids in meeting customer needs effectively.

The roaming feature and connectivity during disconnections are valuable. The antenna system and dual frequencies (2.4GHz and 5GHz) are key, as well as the concurrent handling capability and power consumption efficiency.

I cannot provide concrete areas that need improvement on a global scale since my experience is local. However, Aruba is leading in flexibility compared to Cisco and other competitors.

I have worked in this role for nearly 12 years. I engage with Aruba technologies as part of the solutions I provide.

Stability largely depends on how access points are installed and managed. While Aruba cannot entirely ensure connection reliability, the deployment approach can minimize wireless link downtime.

Aruba is a reliable product worldwide, and its scalability is rated between eight to nine out of ten.

Technical support is rated around seven to eight out of ten. I haven't experienced issues getting the required support when needed.

Neutral

I have worked with Access and Cisco, among other technologies. There is no explicit mention of why a switch occurred.

The initial setup is straightforward if the appropriate technology understanding is present.

Costs are proportional to your requirements. Discounts may be discussed with the distributor.

Brocade Ethernet switches, Huawei, and Juniper are mentioned, however, there is no indication that they were evaluated.

Providing proper support and having an AMC for replacement and support ensure customer satisfaction.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

In general, we have a good experience with Unifi switches in our conference rooms. 

However, we have faced several issues in the last year. We tried changing the cabling, switch, and power injector, but the problems persisted. 

We also use Unifi in hotels and conference rooms, but only one conference room uses Aruba due to its larger size.

Initially, Unifi switches provided a very good experience with ease of management using both the Unifi Controller and my cell phone.

The most valuable aspect of Unifi switches is the Unifi Controller. It makes management very easy, and it's also easy to purchase Unifi products in Argentina. Unifi is a great option for small businesses.

The performance is a concern when connected to the Unifi Controller, as it seems to cause a reduction in performance. The Unifi Controller is slower compared to other options like Aruba.

We have been using it for ten to 15 years.

The performance is good when the access point is used without the controller, yet connecting to the controller alters the performance negatively.

Unifi solutions are very good for starting up, and their scalability is solid. However, they seem to be lacking when connected to the Unifi Controller.

We are currently testing Aruba as it seems to provide better performance than Unifi, specifically for larger conference rooms.

Initially, it was easy to set up, and deployment of access points was straightforward.

Unifi offers very good ROI, however, Aruba is perceived as having better performance.

The cost of Unifi equipment is now expensive compared to Aruba.

We have tested Aruba, and its performance is notably better than Unifi. Aruba provides a very reliable experience, especially for larger setups.

Unifi is a good option for small solutions but might not be the best choice for larger setups. For larger and more robust solutions, Aruba provides a better experience.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use Aruba Instant On Access Points primarily for our small business network needs. We have been working with them for about five years.

I find Aruba Instant On Access Points easy to monitor and appreciate the notifications they provide if there is a problem in the network. 

They are very simple to install, and the deployment was straightforward, requiring only a few minutes. The product is incredibly stable and meets our needs excellently. It also supports user blocking, which enhances our network security.

All features already exist in Aruba Instant On Access Points. However, in future updates, more AI for intelligence and the option for a separate network could be beneficial.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Access Points for five years.

I consider Aruba Instant On Access Points to be very stable.

On a scale of one to ten, I would rate the scalability of Aruba Instant On Access Points as an eight.

I haven't encountered any problems with their technical support. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup was very simple and took only a few minutes.

I carried out the installation by myself without any assistance.

In terms of financial benefits, the Aruba project is a high-cost solution, and I haven't seen specific financial returns.

Aruba Instant On Access Points work without a list price, suggesting that they are open source and no additional licensing costs are incurred.

Many other vendors are used within our Azure branch.

I would recommend Aruba Instant On Access Points to those who have a suitable budget.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use it for office use on laptops, mobile devices, meeting rooms, etc.

Dynamic segmentation and role-based access have simplified the network configuration we have to do whenever a new device comes in. We don't have to change any settings to add new people or devices to the system.

The valuable feature is deep monitoring with the management tools. Configuring everything in the cloud with Aruba Central and having all the devices be independent of a centralized controller has made it simple to deploy.

The pricing could be a little cheaper.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Access Points for six years. We are V15 of the solution.

We've had almost no issues. The only devices that have been damaged were those used outdoors during hurricane season.

It is moderately difficult to find certified engineers. They're not widely available.

Support is good but could be a little better. Whenever there are technical questions, it takes them a while to answer.

Neutral

We used to have Ruckus Wireless, but we switched to Aruba because of its advanced features and solutions' scalability. 

It's really easy to set up. Aruba provides and hosts it. The access points are in our offices, but the management solution is a service. It took probably a couple of days to deploy.

We designed the network beforehand, purchased the devices, did the cabling and switching, had Internet installed in the building, and then deployed the Wi-Fi access points.

Two implementation engineers helped deploy it. One person now performs remote maintenance for all our sites.

I rate the initial setup a ten out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

We have had very few issues. Whenever we've had an issue, we can see what the problem is and fix it quickly. We have also reduced the amount of time and people that we have dedicated to managing the network.

We pay 150 dollars per access point every year.

I rate the product’s pricing an eight out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

We considered several vendors, including Huawei, Ruckus, other HPE brands, and 3Com, but ultimately decided on Aruba.

They have allowed us to segment the different parts of the organization so that they have only the permissions they should have to access what they need and nothing else. And that has made our servers and infrastructure more secure because only authorized people can access them.

There is an opportunity to enter lower SMB segments where Erbway has other products. But it wouldn't be for Ergo Instant. It would be for another line of products from them.

I advise you to get it with Aruba Central. It makes it easier to manage and much simpler. You can monitor it from anywhere. And be sure to have someone who knows Server Central help you set it up. It's good for almost every business access to very large campuses.

There is a dashboard where we can see AI recommendations on potential issues or performance improvements if we change part of the configuration, which has helped us improve network performance or stability over time.

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

I'm in the warehousing business, and we use the solution to create a kind of LAN in the warehouse.

Aruba is much better than other vendors like Cisco and NETGEAR in terms of quality, price, and value for money. We used the 303 series earlier, but now we have moved on to the 505 series.

The solution should include higher speed and lesser cost.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Access Points for five to six years.

I rate the solution a nine out of ten for stability.

We faced some issues with compatibility between the 303 and 505 series in the same environment. Other than that, Aruba Instant On Access Points is a scalable solution. We have 26 to 27 sites and 100 to 200 users on each site regularly use the solution.

The initial setup of the solution is as simple as plug-and-play for me.

In one site, we use approximately 100 to 120 access points. If I remove the cabling part, it takes me about two to three days to deploy and configure them. First, we do the cabling, then connect the device and the switches. Then, we assign an IP address, switch it on, and check whether we are getting the signal or not.

Aruba Instant On Access Points is a stable solution. For the last five years, wherever we have installed this, we have not had any complaints where we had to troubleshoot and replace it. I would recommend the solution to other users because it is a reliable, stable, and trouble-free tool.

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

There are a couple of different use cases. The first one is that I bought it for my home because I needed a dedicated Wi-Fi access point, and I was intrigued with the way it sets up. I enjoyed the performance of it, and I recommended it to a friend of mine who was totally non-tech savvy. The thing that was super cool about it was that he was able to plug it in at home, give me a phone call, read me the serial number, and I was able to provision it remotely.

I also use it at work. It is something that's convenient for other engineers to hop on real quick and do unhindered testing.

I'm using AP12, and I'm using the 1900 switch series. It is 1930 or something like that.

In my organization, our use case for the solution was end-to-end connectivity. In our office, we basically had wall jacks that were dedicated to out-of-band access. In terms of ease of use, I was able to drop this solution in and get it up and running very quickly. It brought deployment times to almost zero because it sets up in about five minutes.

Its physical coverage is good. I've got about a 1600-square-foot home, and I find that it covers all of the insides of my home fine. If I go out outdoors, then it starts to fall off, but it is totally acceptable for my use case.

The maximum number of devices that I've ever connected is about 30. The unit is rated for 64 or 128 users, which is beyond the scope of what I need. So, it falls within my parameters perfectly.

It meets my specification perfectly in terms of the reliability of the coverage when multiple user devices are simultaneously accessing the solution for bandwidth-intensive use.

The app and the provisioning are the best features of the product. It was really impressive that I was able to just provision it remotely. I didn't have to be on-site with my friend, and we were just able to get everything up and operational. So, the app is great. It sends me notifications when things are down, and it tells me how everything is doing.

Its mobile management app or the cloud-based web management app is easy to use, easy to read, and easy to navigate. I would classify it as a prosumer-type product. It is very well placed to compete in the Ubiquiti UniFi market. For someone who is non-technical or someone like myself who is quite technical, being able to drop in and just get it up and running quickly is valuable. It is positioned in a good spot where the functionality and ease of use are in a sweet spot.

When I first deployed the solution, I couldn't use a tagged VLAN for the management. It might already have been fixed in a recent firmware upgrade. 

They should increase the number of devices that can be located at a site.

I would really like it if they added a dedicated router to the lineup. They've got dedicated access points and dedicated switches. Having a dedicated router would be the icing on the cake for the big picture of the whole solution.

It has probably been about a year.

I haven't seen any downtime specific to the solution. It is 100% stable. I am removing other factors that aren't related to the product.

Its scalability needs improvement. You can only put 32 pieces per site. So, there is a limit on scalability. 

Currently, we have between 30 and 40 users of this solution. They are home office users, and there is also the engineering staff to do all sorts of network testing. 

Its use case is pretty isolated. We purchased it to fulfill a very niche scenario, and we don't have any plan to expand its usage beyond what it currently is. 

I've never had to utilize that.

We did not have anything in place previously. We were just using dedicated wired connections.

It was straightforward and easy. We just popped it out of the box. There were about five steps in the instructions. They were straightforward.

There was some infrastructure work, but that wasn't specific to the product. I had to pull infrastructure to the location where the access point was going to be ultimately installed, but that would've been required for any solution. Popping it up on the ceiling and getting the unit online took about 15 minutes.

Once it is set up, it is super easy to manage. I don't even think about it. The updates are scheduled automatically, and I'm only really notified if there is a problem. It is simple.

We didn't use an integrator or reseller for the deployment. For its deployment and maintenance, we don't have any dedicated staff.

For setting it up and managing it, very little knowledge is needed. It would be more than your average consumer, which is why I label the product as a prosumer product. Someone who's a little bit better than the average consumer would be able to pick this product up and get it operational.

I don't know how to quantify that.

It is competitively priced. It was at a price point that made sense for me to put in my home, and that says something. 

The cost of the solution includes everything we need to manage and upgrade our Wi-Fi network, including the mobile management app. Having the licensing and all the functionality built into the base price of the product is really important for me.

There are no extra costs for the security feature or automatic software/firmware updates, which is really important to me. In enterprise-type environments, the biggest thing that's always pushed down is the recurring cost in terms of support licensing, etc. In a small office or home office solution, a lot of times, those recurring costs don't fit the budget. So, being able to drop a solution and have it all baked in really sells the product.

We didn't evaluate other solutions. We were using Aruba Controller, the enterprise solution. It just made sense for us to try the Instant On product. We just jumped right into it.

It comes with a one-year warranty and 90 days of phone support, which is a
pretty standard thing.

For small office or home office type scenarios, I would recommend going for it. It is a great solution. For large-scale enterprise deployments, it is probably not the right solution.

I would rate it a solid eight out of ten.