Aruba Switches Reviews

We primarily use the product for enterprise solutions. We work in industries such as education (colleges and universities), hospitals, and banking. We are focused on banking right now.

The most valuable aspect for our organization is the CX. It's wonderful. 

H switches in the core layer are great. The configuration in the other vendors like Cisco for Data Center are different for H. We have Nexus for H, and we have Cisco Catalyst. While those switches are different and work in different ways, Aruba is the same for us, and this is a wonderful thing.

The initial setup is quick and easy.

I can't think of any features that need to be added. It works quite well for us as it is.

The dashboard could be improved, especially for the CX Switches. It would help to push scripts and configurations via an easy to use dashboard, one which would give us complete visibility of all of our switches in one place. Right now, we have more than one dashboard for Aruba. It would be nice if it was centralized.

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

This product is very stable and very reliable. We don't experience bugs or glitches. It doesn't stop working unexpectedly. It's been great.

We haven't had any issues with scalability at all.

I was using Juniper before Aruba. I still use them, occasionally. For the H switches, Aruba is better and more stable.

The initial setup was not complex. It was quite straightforward. We handled the process very easily.

It doesn't take long, either. You can have it up and running very fast. To deploy the test configuration only took about six to ten minutes.

For Aruba, there is no licensing to deal with, and that's the best. For features or protocols, no licensing is ever needed.

We're partners with Aruba.

I'm a systems engineer, not a technical engineer, so I don't look too closely at the technical aspects of the solution.

I'd recommend the solution to other organizations.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use and sell the 800 series switch. We compare the Aruba switches to the comparable Cisco switches as they have a similar feature set. We can sell them primarily because they cost less than Cisco. We use the Virtual Switching Extension feature that Aruba has for better performance and high availability. Aruba switches can be used in small and large businesses.

We have found that the command line interface is very useful and very similar to Cisco devices. We have also found that the Aruba switches are very easy to use.

I would say that the customization of the switches could be easier to configure.

We have been using Aruba Switches for the last six to seven years.

Aruba switches are a stable solution.

Aruba switches are very scalable. It can be integrated with other solutions. They can be used with either ClearPass or Cisco ICE.

Aruba technical support is very useful. you can contact them with a global number. They answer very quickly, in a few minutes we have the engineer on the call. So the technical support seems better than Cisco from a support perspective.

This initial setup of Aruba switches is very simple. The length of the deployment depends on how many switches are, and what type of switches you're doing, access switches versus the distribution switches. With a larger deployment, we need to take the time to take appropriate order, depending upon the client, location, and all that.

We deploy the Aruba switches for our clients.

Aruba switches are cheaper than Cisco for a similar feature set. The licensing costs are also cheaper than Cisco.

We have also used Cisco switches and they provide a similar feature set.

I would rate Aruba switches at a nine out of a scale of ten.

We provide networks with antennae switches and Wi-Fi switches for small to medium-sized businesses for customers in the UAE.

Aruba is very easy to use, the GUI is very good and the command line is quite similar to Cisco, so it is very easy to configure.

I think that the performance is getting better but they need to have more powerful switches on the market so that they can capture medium and large businesses.

They don't have any data center switches.

It's quite stable. After Cisco HPE Autobus, it's the best on the market.

It's scalable and expandable to some extent.

Fifty to sixty percent of the customers we meet normally use Aruba. They are IT, managers, and administrators.

I have not had much interaction. Their knowledge base is quite good, so normally we don't need to call them.

We have only contacted them a few times.

If you need an RMA, then it would be required, and it is also quite good.

We are happy with the technical support, they are good.

The initial setup is straightforward. It's easy.

For small businesses, it is the best on the market right now.

The recognition is still new.

Aruba is easy to expand and easy to configure.

I would recommend Aruba Switches.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.

Our customer's infrastructure is based on the AKPA solution and we suggested Aruba Switches replace the AKPA Switches.

We like the framework of fabric virtual switching. It is the only virtual link between two switches, particularly with the co-switching environment. The link helps us to avoid issues with the findings tool. 

I think that the environment for our clients should be simplified.

Technical support response time could be better.

This solution is stable, we have not had any issues.

This solution is scalable.

Technical support is available in English and Italian, but they are slow to respond.

Previously we used Ubiquiti, it is cheaper but we went with Aruba and Cisco.

Cisco is stable and we don't have to worry about it not working. Aruba is still new to us, so we don't know it well, or all of the benefits yet.

With documentation and reference points, it's easy. It is easier than Cisco.

It took two to three days to deploy. We had a technician from our company to deploy the solution for our customer. 

We did not implement this solution through a vendor. It was done through our Technicians.

We are system integrators and we propose solutions for our clients.

From what I read in Gartner Magic Quadrant, Aruba Switches rank highly. 

It's a good solution.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our IT infrastructure.

The solution is very reliable. It's easy to use with other solutions.

The pricing could be adjusted.

The interface could be more user-friendly and the dashboard could be improved.

Now and then there tend to be issues if we have a virtual stack. If there's a power failure, the switches come up at different times. This means we have to shut down the stack and then put them up in a proper way. Otherwise, we will have issues with the IP and those kinds of things. I should note that I've only seen this issue with the virtual stack.

The solution is scalable enough. The product itself is fantastic; I've had no issues with scalability. Currently, we have about 700 people using the technology.

The solution's technical support is okay. I would prefer more engagements around new products and roadmaps, however.

I've never used a different solution. At a previous company, we worked with Cisco switches, which I thought were good until I came to this job and saw you could get a cheaper solution that was just as good.

My network is segmented, however, it's not too complex. The last refresh we did was 2016 and that took us two days over a weekend.

We had a provider that assisted us with the implementation.

The pricing is decent. It's less expensive than Cisco.

We use both the cloud and on-premises deployment models.

I would recommend the solution, especially if you are on a tight budget and are looking for a no-nonsense product.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

I find all the special switches really valuable.

I would like to see the data center area improving by some added features in the future.

The solution is very stable.

Well, now with the new switches it's even more scalable than before. So with the 6400 switches it's one complete set of switches these days.

The setup was done by our engineering department, but I have heard that it's easy.

I will rate this solution an eight out of ten at least. I would like to see some additional features to be included in the next release, and I would like more data center functionality for our data center people.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the products that we supply to our customers. We have deployed several different models.

This solution is suitable for SME and SMB, mainly in the hospitality industry.

This solution is easy to use.

We have issues with the stability of this product.

The firmware in this solution has a lot of bugs that become noticeable when you have complex implementations.

One of the issues with Aruba switches has to do with part numbers. For example, in the 9230F series, there are a lot of part numbers with lots of interface names that make the user confused as to which one he can use for the future. Some switches have only a 1Gbs uplink while others have only a 10Gbs uplink, and there are no clear details which one has which interface. The difference comes when you look at the pricing. Having less confusing part numbers would be an improvement.

I have found that the chassis-based switches are scalable but the standard modular switches are not.

In my country, they do not have a strong technical support team. However, I was satisfied with the support.

For basic deployments, the initial setup of this solution is straightforward.

I prefer the ICX switches from Ruckus over this solution.

We supply both Ruckus and Aruba solutions to our customers, but regarding stability, future upgrades, and scalability, we prefer Ruckus over Aruba. We have deployed Ruckus with fewer headaches after finalizing the deployments. I open perhaps five cases in a year with Ruckus and I can open ten tickets or ten cases with Aruba.

We prefer Ruckus solutions over Aruba, whether they are wired or wireless.

I would rate this solution a seven out of ten.

We have the switches on-premises but we also use the private cloud. 

I've got two different remote offices and after deploying Aruba I can manage the network without any problems because it's publicly available. I can be anywhere and still see the network traffic. I can see the network boards and I can do configuration changes to the switches as long as I have a secured account with Aruba Network.

The cloud configuration is the most valuable feature of this solution. Watching in the cloud, propagating the actual devices themselves and the management of devices that are remote is valuable.

In the next release, I would like to see network access control on the switches themselves. I would like to see security functionalities when it comes to monitoring the bit of the wireless section of the switches.

It is very stable compared to what I was previously using.

Scalability is one of the reasons why I went for Aruba. It seems to be one of the top vendors in providing cloud solutions and quite stable when it comes to upscaling and improving the existing environment. 

We have around 250 users. We require two to three staff members for the maintenance. 

We turn to our integrator for support. 

We switched from our previous solution because we wanted to have a robust level grade of equipment.

The level of complexity of the setup is relative to your environment. Deployment took about a month and a half. If we had to include the design stage and other things then it was probably about two to four months in total.

We used a local integrator for the deployment. We had a positive experience with them.

Licensing costs are on a yearly basis.

We also evaluated Cisco Meraki. I did not choose Meraki because of the licensing model. If for some reason you don't renew the subscription, you lose the network and the configuration. With Aruba it's a different story. If you stop your support, you still own your own network so that was one of the major differences.

My advice to someone considering this solution is to play it out before and choose whoever has the better solution.

I would rate it an eight out of ten. 

Not a ten out of ten because there were some major issues like configuration conflicts and by the time we got to solve them, it was a bit of a nightmare until we got it up and running. But there will always be some teething problems. There were problems while implementing until we sorted things out and until it started stabilizing itself. It was either a question of the switch temporarily disconnecting from the internet so it couldn't connect to Aruba Central for the configuration. You can do a configuration but it is accepted as a configuration and it doesn't tell you, for example, what a particular error or something like that is.