Aruba Instant On Access Points Reviews

They have a virtual controller feature that allows access points to function even if the master access point disconnects.

The virtual Controller feature is valuable. 

Improvement as per customer requirements. 

I have experience using Aruba Instant On Acess Point.

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

Aruba Instant On Access Points are primarily used for small offices, private houses, or apartments. The ease of installation and deployment is valuable. The user-friendly interface allows you to manage the equipment easily via smartphone, laptop, or tablet, and you can access it instantly over the internet.

Aruba Instant On Access Points are almost enterprise-level equipment but designed for end users who might not have an IT specialist on staff. They can be used in scenarios similar to those in enterprises. The security features, like easily deploying with RADIUS and dot1x, are efficient and satisfactory, providing enterprise-class security. The solution is future-proof and adapts well to changing connectivity needs. It is easy to extend the network, although there are some limitations. For large buildings, you can separate the network into floors or areas, each containing up to fifty access points, and give them one SSID and password. There might be a small gap when switching between sites, but overall, it can be extended effectively.

It would be good to integrate some marketing features into Aruba Instant On Access Points, like heat maps. This would allow deployment in warehouses or malls to see how people move from one point to another, helping to locate the original fit.

I have experience with Aruba Instant On Access Points. 

We haven't had many performance or stability issues, but with the AP17, which is an outdoor access point, it has only available channels above one hundred. In Ukraine, almost all channels are available to use from thirty-six to one hundred fifty-eight.

Scalability issue arises with obsolete equipment using five gigahertz but lower channels like thirty-six or forty, as they cannot connect to the access point because it turns on channels above one hundred.

The technical support for Aruba Instant On Access Points answers quite fast, approximately within five to six hours, considering the time difference. I think that's great time management since not everyone can answer within that timeframe.

Positive

Apart from Aruba, I've also worked with Ruckus. The main pro of Ruckus is its better performance of beamforming, as it has more antenna patterns than Aruba, Cisco, or any other vendors. For Aruba Instant On Access Points, the pros are stable work, stable performance, and high predictability. When using tools like radio frequency planners such as Ekahau and AirMagnet, you can see a good pattern on your screen, which makes it easy to predict signal transmission. This level of predictability is not as strong with Ruckus.

The initial setup process for Aruba Instant On Access Points is quite easy as you just scan the barcode of the access point, and it’s already on your portal, so you can manage the SSID. It's very easy, and one person is enough to do the full deployment. Maintenance is also not difficult as it has a very user-friendly interface. 

Aruba Instant On Access Points are license-free. It's a very good and cheap solution for wireless networks. It can be compared with solutions from Ubiquiti and TP-Link, but it is in a different class. Aruba Instant On Access Points are cheaper than those from Cisco, Ruckus, and Motorola. It's perhaps the cheapest one. They do not use licenses, so it is a solution from the box. You don't need to pay extra money or deal with hidden payments.

I strongly recommend it because it is not expensive, quite robust, and provides a network for a very low price. It can be deployed very fast and contains every single need. I rate Aruba Instant On Access Points a nine out of ten because there are some flaws with outdoor access points.

The tool's pricing is not good. 

Aruba Instant On Access Points are stable. 

The product is scalable. It has 20 users. 

The tool's deployment is easy. You need to log in to the portal and scan the QR code to add the device. You can complete the deployment in four hours. You need one person to handle it. 

I rate Aruba Instant On Access Points a seven out of ten. I recommend it for the SMB market. 

We have a lot of examples of use cases, but the greatest project is with the Sao Paulo government and the Brazilian government. It’s the biggest project using this kind.

It's easy to manage and install. For the customer, it improves connectivity, the wireless experience, and speed. It improves the overall wireless connection experience.

The radio frequency coverage area is not good. The number of users that can connect at the same time and the user density on a single AP is not good in Aruba. 

Also, Aruba has a lot of switch solutions, and they use a lot of CLI (Command-Line Interface) language. One type of switch might use one language, while another might use an older language. Even within the same product line, you have different languages.

It's not easy to manage everything because even though all the products are within the same system, everything is different.

I have been working with it for two years.

The scalability with Aruba Central, we have a limited capacity. 

Instant On is very limited. There's a limit of 2,000 users and 120 APs in the same cluster. This is very difficult. I don't know how to resolve this. I think the only way is to change to a cloud solution.

The customer service and support are terrible. The global technical support is really bad. It's not good.

Negative

From the partner's perspective, it's easy to install and manage. It's a good solution, a good technology to improve the partner's experience.

It takes three minutes to set it up and deploy it from start to finish. It is pretty easy. 

The deployment model can be both on-premises and cloud. We use Aruba Central in the cloud, and also Instant On app. The most difficult is when they use the Mobility Controller, the on-premises controller solution from Aruba.

The maintenance is easy. 

The return of investment lies in the good experience of the customer. The best way to justify the expensive cost is the good wireless connection experience.

Instant On Access Points are expensive. Compared to other solutions like Ubiquiti and Extreme, they're very expensive.

Overall, I would rate it a nine out of ten. So the product is pretty good, but the technical support is terrible.

Regarding the product's use cases, the solution is good, or else people would have reached out to us complaining about its performance or faulty equipment.

Aruba Instant On Access Points is one of the better types of equipment in terms of entry-level access points though there are not many advanced features that are being used in it. Aruba Instant On Access Points is used in retail, cafeterias, or campus networks to provide access points to provide Wi-Fi.

From an improvement perspective, I hope to see lesser limitations in Aruba Instant On Access Points.

I have been using Aruba Instant On Access Points for less than two years. I use Aruba Instant On AP25 Access Points.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten. We haven't had many complaints coming in from the customers regarding the performance or the equipment, so I think they are a little above average.

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

The product's machine or equipment can cater to around 20 connections and cannot go beyond 50 simultaneous connections, because of which I think the tool's scalability is limited.

In my company, around 200 users are there for Aruba Instant On Access Points.

Aruba Instant On Access Points is suitable for small businesses.

I haven't specifically used the solution's technical support and have always opted for general HPE support. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I use Cisco.

I rate the initial setup a three on a scale of one to ten, where one is easy, and ten is difficult.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

The tool can be deployed in a day.

Two people from my company are needed for deployment.

I rate the product's pricing a six on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive. Solutions from some brands are cheaper than Aruba Instant On Access Points, while others, like Cisco, are expensive.

The product is easy to set up, providing value for time since it is very quick.

Overall, I rate the solution a seven and a half out of ten.

The tool is priced high. 

I have been working with the solution for one to two years. 

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

The solution is scalable. I would rate the tool's scalability an eight out of ten. 

The product's deployment is simple and took around two weeks to complete. 

I would rate the solution's pricing an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

The solution is excellent and reliable.

The solution's range could be better. Presently, it reaches up to a 40-50 ft. radius. It would be helpful for enterprise customers if it covers a 70-80 ft. radius.

The solution's technical support is excellent.

Positive

The solution's initial setup process is easy with Aruba switches. In comparison, it is time-consuming if you use third-party switches.

If you want a reliable and easy-to-implement solution, go for Aruba. I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use the solution in a little medicine department with about 15 to 20 people. They arrive on their computer and work very well. We have never had a problem with the solution. It is deployed on the private cloud.

The solution can be more integrated with other brands.

We have been using the solution for approximately five years and are currently using Access Point 200-Series and 300-Series Instant A.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable, and approximately 15 to 20 people use it.

We have had a good experience with customer service and support. I rate them a ten out of ten.

Positive

We previously used Cisco and D-link, but we switched because this solution was a good alternative.

The initial setup is easy. However, it may be because the people who sold it to us made the initial configuration. Deployment took two days.

We implemented it through a vendor team.

I rate licensing costs an eight out of ten.

I rate the solution nine out of ten. The solution is good but can be improved by allowing integration with other brands.