Aruba Instant Reviews

The product is used for user segmentation, server segmentation, WiFi segmentation, and printer server segmentation.

The most valuable feature of this product is that it is easily deployed.

The product can be improved by adding a clear interface. You can use the Web Green interface however an interface similar to Cisco Catalyst 29 that allows the user to simply configure the product would be useful.

I would like to see clear interface coverage for older models such as 1930.

I have been using the product for one and a half years.

The product is stable. There has been no need for reconfiguration or re-setup.

The product is scalable. It has the ability to connect to other sites.

We previously used Cisco Catalyst 29. 

It was a straightforward setup.

I built a duplicate network on the product that allowed me to replace all the Cisco equipment by simply unplugging the cables from Cisco and plugging them into the new product. The total setup time was about 15 days.

The implementation was done in-house.

I give the product a nine out of ten.

The product comes with all the necessary technical documentation for support. Only one person is required for maintenance.

We primarily use the solution for our wireless network.

It has improved the functionality of our company. It is quite handy.

Aruba Instant is very useful. Even if you just have one device you can create a larger network with just a few configurations. 

You don't have to deal with licenses. 

There is one particular thing that I see that needs improvement. It is a software characteristic, and it is during the reboot. During the startup of the AP, the AP tells you that you are using the wrong password. However, I have realized that this is not true. The AP sees that it's not ready to get the login, and it replies you wrote a wrong password, yet that is not true. The real issue is that the AP is not ready. You get the right login, if you wait five minutes with the same password, it will work. The login is successful. This "wrong password" message should be "Wait, the AP is rebooting."

I've used the solution for one year.

The solution is relatively stable. We had some bugs on some occasions, however, after you are configured, the system is quite stable. It doesn't crash or freeze.

The product can scale. It is definitely good. You just have to add a similar AP sourcing the same version and same model. My wireless networks are quite small, so I don't have more than 100 APs.

The amount of people using it under us is 300 people.

We are integrators, so in the next month, we are going to install some other instant systems.

I've dealt with technical support. How well the response is depends. In general, I feel good with the support and with the professionality and their ability as well. The one thing that I want to be improved is the engineers.

They have to read the entire description. I usually write all of the parameters, for example, the version, my devices, and a description of my infrastructure. And then I received an email, "Please, tell me the version. Please, add a particular file." Yet when I open a case, I add this information from the beginning. They just have to read and get the information. I'd estimate that in at least 50% of the cases, the technicians do not read the notes I send at all.

Positive

The initial setup depends on the configuration that the user wants. The instant infrastructure is relatively straightforward, however, it depends on the environment - including what kind of antenna you have to use if you have an external antenna. The web configuration is quite straightforward depending on the configuration.

We only need three or four people for the installation and the configuration. Once it depends on the environment. 

My company is a system integrator, so we install devices.

It's not easy for me to talk about the cost since I am a technician. I'd rate it a two out of five in terms of affordability. It's more on the expensive side. There might be some extra costs involved depending on the infrastructure. 

We are an integrator, and we have many customers. Then we have a partnership with the distributors, with the sellers.

We work with Aruba devices and Aruba Access Points and Switches. We work with Access Point using Instant Infrastructure, Wireless Controller, or Aruba Central.

There is some confusion about using the website due to the integration with HP. Sometimes you have to go to the HP website and sometimes to Aruba. Also, now, there is the integration with HP GreenLake and you have to log in to an HPE website and then go to the Aruba portal, which is quite confusing. This confuses me. There are too many portals, and it just jumps from one to the other. It's not so handy.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Our company has about 25 access points, and they integrate Aruba Instant. We have authentication integrated with Windows in the main controller for each employee. We also have a guest net portal.

We like that we can assign our employees based on authentication over Windows in the main controller. We couldn't do that with Cisco, so we switched to Aruba for that feature. Other solutions have end of life for devices, but Aruba does not. Cisco becomes completely useless at the end of life.

There is an issue with flooding to the Aruba access point on the ports. The flooding comes from the file transfer, but the two hosts that do the file transfers are on wire, not a wireless connection. So it's strange that we can see that graphic on the access point. We still don't know what is causing the issue. It may be a setting in Aruba, but we don't know. So we are trying to resolve the issue first before contacting technical support.

We have been using this solution for about three years, and I believe we're using version 8.0.9.2. It is deployed on-premises.

Apart from some of the issues we are currently facing, the solution is stable, and we are satisfied.

It is a scalable solution, and we have about 120 users and clients connected to wireless daily and management of the networks are done within by company.

We have not contacted technical support before.

The initial setup was straightforward, and the deployment was completed in-house.

We have a return on investment.

We did not evaluate other solutions before choosing Aruba Instant. We attended a presentation by Aruba, spoke with some Aruba engineers and then decided to try the solution.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten, and I would recommend this solution to others.

I designed a data center for a client, and we used Aruba to develop all the solutions. 

Aruba Instant is simple to deploy and use. 

My biggest problem with Aruba Instant was the DHCP implementation. The DHCP server needs to ping an IP address to connect to the internet. In some cases, we don't have a DHCP server in the network, and it was really a problem. 

Aruba should also add the ability to configure the stack. There is a series in many switches. I don't remember the series that permits this type of configuration, but I think that the stacking configuration will be an advantage for switches that are critical in the business section.

I work with Aruba technical support to deliver the product to our clients. We have to work after hours, nights, and weekends.

Implementing Aruba Instant is straightforward. You can configure it with Aruba's web browser interface or a cell phone app from the App Store or Google Store. 

It's a good solution for small businesses because it's easy to figure out. It's simple to set Aruba up in any configuration, like link aggregation or static loads. It's suitable for less complicated configurations, whereas Cisco devices are bigger and more difficult to implement.

I rate Aruba Instant eight out of 10. 

Our clients use it as a Wi-Fi access point.

The installation is very simple.

We've limited the security feature, which I found valuable, and that allows two separate networks, one for the company and one for a guest network. During installation, it is very easy at that point to divide it.

The connection to it through the interface is nice and easy, and everything can be done through the interface.

The only issue we've had is getting equipment supplies. The availability of the APs that I want to use has been an issue. It took almost two months to get them the first time. I've ordered a few more for another client, and they're still on back order. It has been over a month now.

We've been working with this solution for about a month and have installed it for two clients so far.

So far, it's been very stable.

We deal mostly with small businesses, and for them, I think it's an easy solution with easy deployment and scalability. It is very easily scalable.

We plan to use Aruba Instant as our solution for small businesses.

Technical support was adequate when we did our first installation. We contacted them just to make sure that we were doing it properly, and they were very knowledgeable. It was great.

Positive

One client used a basic ASUS router.

One of the clients switched because their previous solution was done, and the other did so because they were expanding their warehouse and wanted something more.

The initial setup was straightforward and very simple. The deployment was done in a few hours.

We implemented it ourselves for our clients.

It's a one time cost, including the upgrades, but you have to pay on a yearly basis if you want support.

The price is in the middle in comparison to that of competitors' products.

We looked mainly at Ruckus, but Aruba Instant On's interface was nice and user friendly as well.

Aruba Instant On is a good solution for small businesses. I would rate it at eight on a scale from one to ten.

We use a mixture of deployment models. Sometimes it's hybrid, on-premise, or on the cloud.

The most valuable features of Aruba Instant are management and performance.

Aruba Instant can improve by increasing the gigabit range of the switch or by adding additional management features and tools. It can be helpful.

In a future release, there could be some improvements in the dashboards. At this time dashboards are only available with a wizard.

I have used Aruba Instant within the last 12 months.

I have found Aruba Instant to be stable.

Aruba Instant is scalable.

Technical support is perfectly fine because we have an in-house team that is comfortable with Aruba Instant. As for Aruba Instant technical support, it is perfect.

I have previously used other solutions, such as SEIM and Cisco. I have found the features in Aruba Instant to be better than in SEIM or Cisco. 

Aruba Instant installation was simple.

Some aspect of the price of Aruba Instant is very economical because if the customer is requiring more features the customer needs to pay a higher amount.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Aruba Instant a nine out of ten.

We prefer to use this solution for smaller organizations.

For private customers, generally we prefer a private cloud. If it's a government-based company, like central government and government-based companies, they prefer on-prem.

There are six people using this solution in our environment.

It has improved our organization because it's local management, and the access point has the same ability to have controller functionality. Obviously, one is the price. There is local accessibility, and the manageability is much easier.

The cost is low, and there is controller-less architecture.

I think they're missing roadmaps to the partners and the customers. They're releasing the products, but there are no quick updates to the partners and the customers.

They need to communicate better with the partners when it comes to training.

I have used this solution for about six years.

The solution is stable.

Technical support was good.

We used a different solution and switched because of a customer requirement, not a specific technical reason. Some customers ask for Aruba.

The initial setup was easy. Deployment takes a day. We used five or six people for deployment.

We saw ROI from this solution.

The cost was affordable.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

We propose it to our customers for Wireless LAN. Internally, in our company, we use Cisco. 

We have many customers, and we implement wireless systems with Aruba, Cisco, and Extreme. There are many customers that use Instant Cluster, and we have customers that use it on-premise. It depends on the people working at the customer side. 

It is very cheap. I can use the access points without an additional license. 

I can implement it at small sites, and I can also implement it at mid-sized locations. It is very flexible. It is really nice and useful for customers who have many small sites. 

It is good as it is. If anything, its reporting could be improved. 

At the moment, I don't see any new features that we really need.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

It is very stable. It works very well.

It is scalable.

I don't know about their support. It is working fine, and I have had no problem with it.

If I need any information, I can take the help of the Aruba Community. I have access to all the resources on Aruba, and I can search for information if I need to implement things that are not normal and that are not base configuration. I can find everything about Aruba.

It is very easy. I like its setup. It is done in an hour. 

It is not expensive. Its price is fair. You get many features with the normal licensing. If I look at Cisco, it is very expensive if I need similar things.

It is working very well at the moment. I see no problem with it, but it has its own use case. I can't use it everywhere. It is not suitable for a big campus area. I would need a controller-based system such as Aruba Controller.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It is very good, and I like it.