Aruba Networks Wireless WAN Reviews

We primarily use the solution as an instant access point with a built in virtual controller. It's a wireless product.

No other wireless product has the same capabilities. With Aruba, users just need access points and do not need a controller. Access points can act as controllers. With 50 to 60 access points, we can use another Aruba product to help with management below 50 or 60 access points. If we have thousands of access points, at that point, we would need to go for a controller. 

The solution can scale.

It is stable.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

Depending on the level of support you have (paid or standard), they are responsive. 

We'd like to have a bit more artificial intelligence incorporated into existing products. It would give them more market gain and make their product more robust. 

I've been using the solution for five to six years. 

The solution is quite stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It is reliable. 

If you have a small setup, it's quite easy to manage. You don't need to have the big hardware in place. If you have a very large infrastructure setup you might need to have a traditional WiFi setup.

It is quite scalable. How easy it is to expand depends on what scaling you are doing. For example, if you are adding more hardware or more access points. A small setup is quite easy to manage as you don't have so much hardware. However, a bigger setup might require additional WiFi expansion.

You can scale it to a great extent. 

We're a small company. We have less than 50 users. That said, we also have clients that use the solution. 

We do not have plans to increase usage. 

We've used technical support. They are pretty good. However, it depends on if you have a standard or paid support. Paid support allows you to call directly. Standard support is slower, and you need to communicate via email. 

We also use Cisco. I'm familiar with Juniper as well. 

The initial setup isn't too difficult. You just need to have a bit of background knowledge. It's pretty straightforward. 

The deployment depends on if you will use Aruba Central, a centralized could management platform, which makes the deployment easier. If you don't use that, you do need to do everything from scratch. The length of time it takes to deploy depends on the size of the setup. The physical mounting is always something that takes time. For the configuration, if you have configuration planning already in place, it won't take too long. It might take a week to a month for a smaller setup of 50 access points. 

If you have all the test points mounted up and they have all been cabled towards POE switches, and they have the necessary firmware and everything in place, and you have also planning in place including what are the access IDs and what security measures will be taking place, then it will be quite fast to do it.

You only need one or two people to handle the initial setup.

I've not witnessed any ROI.

They have various types of licensing to choose from. They have licenses for security and firewalls, et cetera. There are different licenses for products and different types of features as well. 

Most licenses are subscription-based. There are a few perpetual licenses as well. 

I was looking at Juniper Mist and noted that this product has more AI. Aruba is not too evolved when it comes to AI. 

We're not necessarily on the latest version of the solution. We are due for an upgrade.

If someone has a smaller setup, Juniper may be a good option. However, with bigger setups and more unique features, Aruba is a good choice. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is deployed for communication, and we have about 13 sites controlled in a centralized location. We have next-step security authentication, and it supports end-user secure connectivity. The combination and mechanism of multiple servers are used to authenticate the user to connect to the network securely.

Our whole company uses this network, providing wireless connectivity on all sides. So this solution impacts our day-to-day tasks.

The most valuable feature is security, which is important to the company and end user. In addition, the solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great. The software and hardware are excellent, and we can efficiently deploy and manage these devices.

Regarding additional features, the solution currently has a Windows update problem. As a result, the solution requires daily Windows updates and installations as well as launches of new patches. It also requires updates to the iOS firmware to support the day-to-day patches submitted by Windows.

Because we work out of Pakistan, we sometimes have to deploy this solution in areas with a lot of dust. So, it would be great if Aruba improves the environmental hardware materials to mitigate troubleshooting and decrease the amount of dust it accumulates.

We have been using this solution for seven years and recently deployed the latest version. It is deployed on a local network.

It is a stable solution.

The solution is scalable. We have a lot of users, most of whom are IT specialists. For example, we have four people required for maintenance in the IT department and two junior network engineers continuously controlling the solution.

The technical support for this product regarding the vendor is great. Our principal or local vendor is available to facilitate any issues that arise.

Before using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, we had been working on Cisco and Awale, which are somewhat competitors of this solution. We also deployed Awale, which works fine, but Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is widely used in our company.

The initial setup was straightforward, and it took about two days to deploy. We used a third party to deploy the network and performed day-to-day tasks easily. There was no issue with installation, and deployment on a large scale was painless.

Regarding licensing costs, our procurement and finance departments are directly involved, and we evaluate the functionality of this product. Based on the market comparison, Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is cheaper than Cisco, and the web experience is great. As a result, its functionality and performance are practical.

If we were not using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, we would use Cisco. Cisco and Aruba have the same solution and provide a controller-based network and ISE. The functionality of both devices is the same, and the key difference is the vendor and branding. The dependability and scalability of both products are good too.

I rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

I like the solution's ability to add multiple SSIDs on different levels such as enterprise and guest networks. 

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is expensive. 

I have been working with the product for five years. 

I would rate Aruba Networks Wireless WAN's stability a ten out of ten. 

I would rate the tool's scalability a ten out of ten. We have 542 clients using the products. 

The product's lifetime warranty is second to none. They will replace a system that has gone down with an identical unit. 

The tool's setup was easy. 

You will need to pay an annual subscription cost. 

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. Try to negotiate the best price that you can get. 

I use the solution for cloud operations.

It's just a normal tool. I would really say nothing is valuable to me about its features. It's not special.

It had been working in the past few years, but after aging, it has dropped down.

The solution has bugs. It really has bugs, and you have to wait until it happens, then you realize it. The aforementioned area can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN for five years. I am a customer of the solution.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a five, six, or seven out of ten. It's not bad.

I rate the support an eight out of ten since it is good.

Positive

Regarding the initial setup, if one is difficult and ten is easy, I rate its setup a three to five. You have to be a big technical person to deploy the solution.

I rate the solution a six or seven out of ten.

Warehousing and manufacturing are the primary ones that I've been in, but we also do campuses, schools, and healthcare.

I believe their Adaptive Radio Management (ARM) in its current form provides the best automated management of transmit power and channel. It does a really good job of managing proper design and wireless environment.

It is a little bit cumbersome to configure. If you're designing a WLAN and you want to do and cover certain types of clients, you really have to know different settings and how they interact with one another. If they could automate that so that if you are designing for one type of equipment, you could, in essence, run a wizard. That would certainly save on a lot of calls to tech support.

I have been working with this solution for 10 years.

Its stability is good. I've not seen major failures.

It is absolutely scalable.

It is pretty straightforward. Setting up the environment is fairly straightforward, adding access points to the environment is fairly straightforward, and the upgrade process is relatively straightforward. It comes down to when you're doing something specific in the design for the client that you're trying to deal with. That's where it becomes a little bit more complex. You need to know where to go and look, but the standard setup is very straightforward.

That's really subject to the type of environment you're deploying. If you're doing a full controller model with 200 APs, the initial deployment could be 150 grand. Maintaining that or maintaining support for that per year could be something like 10 to 15 grand per year.

In the cloud sense, the cloud is by the number of APs. So, everything is readily available.

I would not hesitate to implement it. It is a good product. I would rate it a nine out of ten.

We're basically using the solution to replace our StarVPN connectivity. Prior to this, we had a bunch of VPNs that were creating our WAN that would link back to our central office. It simplified our network. That's what we used it for. We installed one in every office to create the WAN between offices. In the potential next phase, we were looking to then possibly decrease our internet connectivity to each site, however, we didn't do that quite yet.

The two most valuable features for us were the fact that we were able to simplify and recreate our WAN with a similar security presence and also the ability to run a single WiFi SSID across the entire company with authentication.

It worked as delivered, and therefore, there's nothing to really add. If you were asking me what they could do better, unfortunately, I quite honestly can't think of anything right now. It doesn't mean that if I was in the middle of using it, there isn't something that would be annoying to me. However, right now, it’s absolutely fine.

The integration, pricing, and configuration could always be improved upon.

I’ve used the solution for two years.

It's quite stable. It didn't come down yet. We didn't have any issues for the past year or so. We did execute a couple of updates. Those were clean and it worked just fine. It’s reliable. The performance is good.

It worked for the scale that we asked it to. That said, we installed it and we didn't grow it. The whole company, about 175 people, use the product.

The technical support was great. We’ve been satisfied with their service.

I’ve also dealt with Cisco and found Aruba more affordable with better support.

It was straightforward to set up. It worked as advertised. I didn't do the actual deployment myself. However, my deployment team was able to roll it out earlier than projected. Prior to making the selection, I had estimated more time than it took for us to deploy. In that sense, it was fantastic. The deployment was very quick.

We've got five people supporting all of our networking and hardware requirements. We don't have any one person dedicated to it.

I’m not sure of the exact pricing of the product.

This solution is more than worth considering. I've used Aruba in different organizations. It historically has, to me, been an easier install than Cisco wireless solutions have been. It consistently gives similar services at a lower price point. I have found that their pre-sales teams and support have been better than similarly situated Cisco WiFi and WAN products.

I’d rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The solution should be cheaper.

I have been using Aruba Networks Wireless WAN for about a month.

I rate the stability an eight out of ten. 

The initial setup is straightforward.

The solution is expensive. 

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.