Aruba Switches Reviews

The primary use case of this solution is as the edge and the core switches for our company network.

We are working on an ERP system, domain controller, warehouse management, Salesforce automation, and many other applications.

It's a reliable product that you can depend on. 

You can use it for a long time without any issues.

Visibility needs improvement. We don't have visibility in Aruba Switches and we are thinking of switching to FortiSwitch because it has visibility. 

Currently, we have visibility and compatibility with the firewall. Through the firewall, we can see the entire network.

They are not very active with this solution. There is no followup with the vendors and resellers, they do not contact us to inform us of new technologies as they do with Cisco and Fortinet. Other vendors are more active in the community.

In the next release, I would like to see visibility included, as well as better integration with other platforms. 

I have been working wit Aruba Switches for approximately 11 years.

We are working with the 251 and 190 series.

Aruba switches are stable, but we have a few that are hanging.

Aruba Switches are scalable.

We have more than 1,000 users in our company. We have 15 administrators and four people to maintain the network. 

Technical support is moderate, not excellent. We have been waiting for more than two months for our switches that are hanging to be replaced.

Maintenance and after-sales service are not good.

We started with Aruba a long time ago when they were originally 3Com Switches.

The initial setup is straightforward, not complex.

Cisco is more complex than Aruba is.

We have many resellers and system integrators in our country, including Cisco and Fortinet.

There are no licenses, you just purchase the switch. 

Comparing with Cisco, and some other solutions, it's a cheap product.

We are considering migrating from Aruba to possibly Cisco, or to Fortinet FortiSwitch.

We are comparing and conducting studies in order to move forward.

We have experience working in networking products, high-security products like firewalls, switches, and all data center products.

We would happy to use Aruba Switches in the future if there are new technologies that meet our requirements, and our needs regarding visibility. Having visibility in the entire network and to see all of the parts of the network is something that is important to us.

In general, I recommend Aruba Switches.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use Aruba switches to provide a stable and comfortable industrial environment.

Aruba switches are more flexible, easy to use, have a good topology and are self-managing.

I have an opinion about Aruba controllers. Aruba access points do not require any controllers. Aruba controllers have different VLANS and there is no need to configure the access points, rather only the controller. You can put different VLANs on the same controllers. You don’t need to reconfigure it. This is a good feature that would be a good vehicle to use in the next release.

I have four years of experience using Aruba Switches.

We didn't experience any stability or scalability issues until now with Aruba Switches

We actually are the technical support because we are from HP. We give Aruba support and LT support to Aruba customers and users.

So, because my basic profile is network only, I have experience with wifi solutions like Aruba, Cisco, Ruckus and switches also dealing with Cisco and Aruba Switches and HPE switches also— 3Com. I also work with voice environments like Siemens IP PBX, HiPath, Siemens data and Jira. I also worked with Avaya PBX and Nortel PBX.

I was in HP for more than four years where I was the team leader, managing 14 locations and area network and voice leader.

I have four years of experience working with Aruba but I have more than 10 years of experience with Cisco. If you are working in the manufacturing industry or in an environment with high heat and high temperatures, then I would recommend Aruba Switches, but if you work for a small business, then Cisco would be best.

Overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give Aruba Switches a nine. We do not give out ratings of 100% quality on any products.

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 Aruba switches as part of our network infrastructure.

The most valuable feature is the security that these switches provide.

We would like to see centralized, cloud-based management.

If the price were lower then it would be more competitive with other products by vendors such as Cisco and Ruckus.

I have been working with Aruba switches for more than ten years.

In our experience, this is a stable product. Once they are configured, you rarely get any problems.

We have rarely had problems with our switches. When there is an issue with the hardware, it is replaced on the spot because we bought the lifetime limited warranty for them.

The price of these switches is high.

The most popular vendors for this type of product in the UAE are Cisco, HPE, and Ruckus.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for our company, in the office. We use it for its monitoring capabilities.

The solution's most valuable aspect is its monitoring capabilities. It works great for our organization.

Overall, it's a very good product. There isn't really a feature that needs to be simplified or improved.

The element of security always can be improved. If the solution continues to improve its security functionality, it will continue to be a great product.

I've been using the solution for around five years.

The solution is stable. We haven't had any issues with the reliability at all. It doesn't crash. There aren't bugs and glitches that affect the way it works.

The solution is scalable. If an organization needs to expand it out, they should be able to do so easily. The saying is quite good.

Although we've heard of Cisco, we never use it. We wouldn't recommend the solution above Aruba.

The initial setup was not complex at all. It was fairly straightforward.

We're only an Aruba customer. We don't have any special relationship with Aruba.

I recommend the product. It's very good. I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. If the security was just a little bit better, I would give it full marks. As it is right now, the security could always be improved upon.

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.

The primary use case of this solution is for access points. You can look at any site and take the static ID, or the real ID. It's similar to VPN.

With the access point, you take the real ID and install it in the controller, you then access the site with this access point.

We are interior designers and we have many showroom sites, we use the Aruba controller. We have twenty-five Aruba Switches with fifteen to twenty access points.

We are using the 205 and 215 series. The bandwidth is 1gHz.

The most valuable features are the controller and the access points. Aruba access points have a good transfer rate.

It is powerful for the internet, the GUI is good, the configuration is very good, and it is very easy to use. In contrast, the Cisco configuration does not have a GUI.

Aruba has many features that are very good.

Managing Aruba Switches is not as good as Cisco Controller.

The switch needs to be bigger than it is now. Increasing the number of gigabytes in the switch would improve the switch interacting. You can download the DBS or the datasheet to see the switch interacting.

The switch interacting is the transfer of data from the port to the switch.

They should provide training courses for certification, and have it available on the internet.

They need to increase marketing for their products, especially for the solutions that are stable and very hard working. They should plan an event to market this solution.

Aruba could consider opening a training center for engineering, or IT students.

A suggestion would be to see the unit have a configuration switch like SMTP to send an email to the users if the performance is delayed or down. That would be very useful.

In the command line, we can configure in SMTP to send an email alert to the user and the support worldwide, so that they can know about the problem before it happens.

This solution is very stable.

We have two ways to do the configuration. There are the standard way and Care. If you configure Care, we have a controller and things are fine.

We can deploy the configuration by the controller appliance. The access point can be made into a controller.

The solution is scalable.

With many ports, we blended for the first time and we did not face any problems.

You have to have a plan to expand or increase to a table or other devices.

The technical support is okay, I would rate them a four out of five.

We had some issues with resetting the password, it requires a special technique, there is some reconfiguration involved. 

The guide on the internet is very helpful and easy. You can do a specific search on the internet describing the error or the problem and you will get a very simple, easy, and quick answer.

We have a client who has a nine-story apartment building and in our design, and we researched the internet for different access points. 

We presented the client with Cisco and TriCom, but our customer was not satisfied. We then introduced Aruba to the client and he was satisfied with the performance and our design.

The initial setup is straightforward. It only took fifteen minutes to deploy.

It depends on the number of VLAN, or if there are any rules in the switch. This is all according to the configuration and the settings.

We have three engineers helping with the deployment.

We did not use a vendor team to implement this solution. We did it ourselves.

This solution is not cheap and they don't have a plan to certify it as Cisco does. Cisco is a famous vendor with options for certification.

Aruba does not have a certified license in ARC and CNV. Their certification is for the marketing of the device in Cisco.

The license is annual. If you purchase a switch, you get a one-year free subscription.

Aruba has better pricing than Cisco.

We used and configured Tricom Switches. HP merged with Tricom and the company after that Aruba merged with HP.

The switch became very different, it is good and has a different configuration.

We have had a few problems in our company, we have had some conflicts in the configuration.

Aruba was the first company to introduce access points, as far back as ten years ago.

It's a good product, but it's not equal to Cisco. It's better. I compare it with Cisco and Aruba is a better switch. With Cisco,  you buy the name, history, and global branding.

If an engineer or any company ask me about network solutions, I recommend Aruba.

I have some concerns because not many engineers write on the command line in Aruba. Not many engineers know the solution, unlike Cisco, which is well known in the education industry and on the market.

If you can configure the Aruba Switch for the very first time without any issues, then you are a very good engineer, you know the solution.

Aruba Access points, controller, and performance are the best!

I would rate this solution a ten 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 use four Aruba Switches, in one stack, for 802.1X.

We use Aruba Switches mainly as access points.

The most valuable feature is the Aruba Smart Rate Port.

The templates to automate our switches need improvement.

We apply a template using Bison or ANSI C to automate our tasks daily.

We are using Bison and ANSI C programming language to automate our work for shutting down ports, and if the support has locked our shutdown with port security.

Cisco has Nexus Switches for the Data Center solutions. These switches are very powerful. In my research, I haven't found anything that is comparable.

In the next release or the near future, I would like similar Data Cente switches included.

Aruba Switches are very stable when you are using the full solution. 

Aruba Switches are still in the testing phase.

We haven't tested the scalability for this solution yet, but there is another building that we are expanding to and we expect it to scale there.

We have approximately one thousand users.

We have not had any issues with this solution so we have not opened any tickets with technical support.

We were using other switches by Aruba prior to these. We stayed with Aruba to maintain compatibility.

The initial setup of this solution is very simple.

When we implemented the solution, we called a vendor to support us.

We have an in house assistant who configured the solution, but we had a vendor here to support us if we needed it.

We configured all of our switches to gain the experience.

I have also used Cisco switches and they are harder to set up.

I received training on this solution from HP, here in Egypt.

I strongly recommend Aruba Switches with Aruba products for compatibility. If you use Cisco or other solutions, it may cause some issues with the stability of the environment.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for extra switches on campuses and consecutive exchange of existing access switches. 

The zero-touch provisioning made it possible for electricians to install and wire the switches that allows for the continuation with the zero touch provisioning mechanism afterward. It has really helped us to save our manpower within the network support group.

The solution's most valuable aspect is that it integrates with ClearPass, which allows us to use the same management for wireless LAN and wired LAN. 

The written documentation, all the available documentation, is often a little bit hard to find. The solution lacks documentation of recent features. We have access directly to Aruba, Germany, so they are always helpful, but if you start, for instance, with something a little bit more complex like zero-touch provisioning, that would require a more comprehensive written piece. 

The available REST API is invaluable for elegant integration with the core and distribution network.  

There are some new multicast features coming up, but they are just in the process of preparation by IEEE, and I would like to see them as soon as possible.

The solution's stability is really great. We found it very solid. 

The scalability of the solution is good. With the management of ClearPass, it's great. We've been using the feature of building stacks with it, and its really, really easy to handle a large scale environment.

Technical support has been great. Together with the consultant, we set up a regular phone call with Aruba to discuss the issues surrounding setting up the whole system. They always came up with quick solutions, called us back and they've been really, really helpful overall.

We previously used Brocade. The switches portion of the organization was bought by Extreme Networks. The company broke down, which is why we had to switch. The hardware of Brocade was brilliant, but at some point, the development and the stability of firmware lacked, since developers may have moved on before the company broke down.

The setup is mostly straightforward. Deployment, together with the WiFi, took about a month. We had three people on our side assisting with the implementation and have three people currently handling maintenance.

We did the initial set up with the help of a service provider of Aruba. We wrote templates and did the first template with the service provider, who was experienced and was really helpful.

With their assistance, the experience was optimal. We had been really late with our decision to purchase Aruba and we, with the help of the consultants, have since been able to bring up the whole system in time so that the existing schedule for opening the hospital was never endangered. 

We just had all the licenses for five years included in the bidding process. Since the competitive nature of the resulting contract, our actual costs might not reflect the standard market prices. Due to the visibilityof our project, Aruba has been generous with the included amount of licenses, which will serve us for years to come.

As a public hospital we are obliged to implement a public bidding process. We had been in discussions with many companies, including, for example, Cisco. 

In the end, it came down to financial issues. Once you have your requirements fixed, every Vendor has the chance to give you a proper offer through ist sales channel. With all the requirements, including for example common management of wired and wireless access, WLAN integrated Bluetooth capabilities  Cisco failed to meet the offer of Aruba.

We've been implementing, with the help of Aruba, with zero-touch provisioning in a newly opened hospital. Roughly 450 switches have been put into operation using zero-touch provisioning (ZTP). It was challenging;  even Aruba probably hadn't done such a large scale project before using ZTP.

In terms of advice, I'd say if you are entering the next stage of switch hardware, of network hardware, just have a look at Aruba. It's really, really helpful having an open API to use Python or other script languages to modify configurations and to automate exchange of state changes with neighbouring structures.

We try to keep as close as possible to standards. There are some areas where standards aren't available, for instance stacking of network Access switches, whre no vendor-independent standards is existing yet. So look at the whole package including the switch hardware, the licenses, the license for management and bear in mind the transceivers. 

When using Aruba switches, stick with the automation tools, don't let yourself be seduced into going back to manual configuration.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. They would be perfect, but there's a noise once they are on under heavy load in a warm environment. It might be the case that they are not usable for installations where the loudness damping between the installation room and office is not sufficient.

The primary use case of this solution is for Network connection and centralized monitoring and troubleshooting.

The switching configuration is very simple and not as complicated as Cisco. It's easy to do and the deployment is very quick.

When it comes to RMA, the replacement of Aruba parts is very good, and they are very prompt.

There is a limited lifetime warranty with the switches, so if we have any problems, the switch is replaced very quickly. As an example, if I call in the morning, by tomorrow I will receive a box with the replacement.

Visibility and controls need to be improved. When I compare the Aruba switch with Meraki, Meraki has more visibility and more controls.

HPE Aruba has not done any development and research on the SD LAN. They may have another solution for the SD LAN.

Aruba should have SD LAN features to provide more visibility on the network and to be able to control things like the traffic shifting or for voice or data. Currently, Aruba does not have this capability.

It may be there, but it's tedious.

In the next release or the very near future, I think that it is very important to simplify the dashboard and features similar to Meraki. Meraki has a good dashboard and the way they are presenting the information is very useful.

I am forced to consider changing products because other solutions have a better dashboard and a user-friendly interface. Other solutions also have better control and visibility.

This solution is quite stable. To date, we have not had any complaints.

We have our HP IMC (Intelligence Management Center), which is a centralized management control center where I can monitor all of the switches. I can monitor the health of the network appliances, and the CPUs main process. Everything.

This solution is scalable.

We have not had to contact technical support. We handle the issues with our in-house resources.

I have experience with Cisco Meraki switches.

The initial setup is very easy.

The implementation and configuration are not that difficult.

If you have ten to fifteen switches it can take a day. You have to stack it, then put them all together, complete the configuration, the hardening, and the testing, that is a complete full day, eight hours.

I would recommend this product.

I would rate this product a seven out of ten.

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.