Share your experience using Motorola Wireless WAN [EOL]

We use the tool internally and for client portfolios.

We had a client with a power plant. Different wireless devices from various brands caused problems. We fixed it using the Ubiquiti Wireless UDM controller and installed 75 access points and antennas.

The tool's most valuable feature is SD-WAN. It is easy to use and manage. In terms of reliability, we don't get many tickets or a service request after the installation. It's like installing and forgetting the device. In one railway construction project where we installed Ubiquiti three years ago, we've only received two inquiries since then. We provide remote support.

The solution has very good product lines. However, it feels like some models overlap. For example, a new model is announced after three months, and another new model is announced shortly after. So, the release cycle feels too short, and some features overlap. Overall, the products are very good and reliable.

I have been using the product for five years.

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten.

Combining internal users within our organization and clients in our existing managed service, we have approximately 3,000-3,500 users using Ubiquiti Wireless. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

I rated technical support as an eight out of ten because we rarely need to call them. Instead, we usually email the community or local distributors for support, and they assist us. However, in terms of implementation, we don't rely on technical support.

Positive

I used Aruba, Meraki, D-Link, and Cisco before Ubiquiti Wireless. We chose to switch from Cisco, Aruba, and Meraki to Ubiquiti Wireless mainly because most clients prefer cost-effective solutions. While brands like Aruba and Cisco are expensive. Ubiquiti is a US brand.

Our organization handles Ubiquiti Wireless maintenance and troubleshooting internally. We also provide managed services for some clients, managing all the day-to-day transactions and monitoring their wireless networks. We have about eight wireless engineers responsible for all technical aspects, including deployment and maintenance of Ubiquiti Wireless and other technical tasks.

The tool doesn't have any licensing costs.

We don't solely rely on built-in firewall features for enterprise-level security. Instead, we often use another brand or third-party firewall the client prefers as the primary defense. For clients with less sensitive data transactions or those running via the cloud, we trust the firewall features of Ubiquiti's UDM Pro.

I rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement, and we anticipate future developments and innovations.

The solution's most valuable feature is its user-friendly interface. For now, my company is testing the tool on Cisco's IoT solutions. The tool is very simple to use.

The support of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using Cisco Wireless WAN for seven years. I am not only a user of the product since I also sell it. It is important for me to know how the product works along with what new features get introduced in the tool. I am a distributor of the tool.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Sometimes, there are some bug-related problems in the product, but they are not critical issues. The reason that my company is impacted by some bug-related issues in the product is that our company might not know something we should be aware of during the configuration phase. If my company faces any problems with the product, then we can connect with Cisco's support team.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

My company caters to the needs of small, medium, and enterprise-sized companies.

Two years ago, Cisco's support was normal. For the past two years, the support has not been good. The product's support team operates worldwide.

I rate the support a five out of ten.

Neutral

I rate the implementation process an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one means that it is a difficult process, and ten means that it is an easy process.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and also on an on-premises model.

The time taken to implement the product to something depends on the network of our company's customers network. If our company's customers have a simple network, the implementation can be done very fast. If our company's customers have tools like Meraki, the implementation process can take three to four days or a week to complete.

I rate the product price a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is low price and ten is high price.

Speaking about whether the tool gets used in our company for backup connectivity, I would say that our company's engineers use it for testing purposes.

The security features of the product have improved our company's network safety.

The product has sometimes helped our company handle network failure, failover, or recovery areas.

I recommend the product to those who plan to use it.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.