Aruba Wireless Reviews

We provide services for clients, so it's always a different use case. For example, we work with a retailer and we focus on electronic tasks. Another is corporate offices in a bank, one of the biggest banks in Mexico. Another is massive events like the Olympics with different sponsors. There's a big difference in the type of use cases.

In the case of the contacts or the callers, Aruba Wireless offers a good user experience. For example, there are a lot of the contacts in the retail store, we are talking about 100,000 users connected at one time. After evaluation, Aruba Wireless was considered best for large numbers of users like this. 

The network times for protocol synchronization can be improved. Sometimes it's complicated, and we need to tweak it to coordinate or synchronize it to the clock at the network access point.

I have some issues with the introductory domain with the frequency that we use. For example, it's very common to have a box with a frequency channel with the introductory domains in Mexico. The access points have some issues in this release; I think it's version eight.

Sometimes the documentation is confusing. You have to figure out a lot of different placements on your own because of the outdated information.

I have used Aruba Wireless for about five years. 

Aruba Wireless seems to be very stable. I don't remember having any issues with stability. 

Aruba Wireless is scalable. You can add more people. You can use the same configuration for 50 or 2,000, or 5,000 users.

Aruba Wireless technical support is too slow, or it used to be. For example, to test a domain in Mexico, they would spend about three months.

The initial setup is complicated because you have to modify many options, and you have to spend time handling those options, and sometimes you need attendants for these options.

We always evaluate options to see what's best. For example, sometimes, the ARM is more relative, and Aruba is more efficient than others. Cisco has the same functionality, but sometimes the main link will disconnect the users. You don't have that problem with Aruba Wireless. 

For those interesting in using Aruba Wireless, I would recommend taking a simplified approach to the license. They should analyze options relevant to their systems as it can get more complex. At this moment, there are a lot of licensing options.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Aruba Wireless a nine.

We use the product predominately for beacons and peer devices.

It has very flexible features.

I believe more security options are needed.

I have been using the product for seven or eight years.

We have not had any problems with the stability of the product.

It is a scalable solution.

When we have had to use support, everything from the service was helpful.

We have used Cisco products in the past.

The setup is not a problem, it only took five minutes or so.

We used five technicians for the deployment of the product.

I rate Aruba Wireless a nine out of ten.

We have about 30 APs and a lot of sites with centralized management on controller 7030. We use it to control the network in standalone mode and handle the active and standby modes.

All features are useful for me. It lets me perform some specific configurations depending on the site or the client. All WAN features are valuable.

Their documentation needs to be improved. Aruba's documentation is poor.

I have been using Aruba Wireless Controllers for about a year.

Its stability is okay. There is no issue with stability.

Its scalability is okay.

Their support is good. When I need to open a case, I get a fast response. I can contact the technician immediately. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

I also use Cisco solutions. Both solutions are very good and suitable for different kinds of networks. Cisco is very good for certain kinds of networks, and Aruba is good for other kinds. Cisco is simpler to deploy, whereas Aruba is more complicated and complex to deploy.

The initial setup was very complex because we deployed a new controller in a small network. It is useful for large networks, but for small networks, it is very difficult to understand all the models. If you don't use Mobility Master, the configuration and deployment are very complex. It took us six months to deploy it.

We got help from a third-party vendor, not Aruba. They were okay. We didn't have any problem.

You should know about the topology of the Aruba Wireless solution. It is very important because it depends on the size of the network. Otherwise, you might end up buying something that's not adequate for large networks.

I would rate Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

Aruba was our primary wireless solution until very recently.  

In the end, when you bring on a wireless solution, you only need a wireless solution. That is the intrinsic value. We had both Aruba ClearPass and Aruba AirWaves. We had all the management features also available from Aruba. These worked well together as a class of products.   

When I compare Aruba with Juniper Mist, Juniper is the more an AI-driven management solution. It is more of a modern solution, I think. Aruba needs to be more competitive with Juniper.  

We have been using Aruba Wireless for four or five years now.  

I think Aruba is stable because it was working okay. There was no problem with downtime. The issue for us with functionality was because we have much more reflection in our building due to the height of our ceilings.  

We bought the product through a reseller. For support, we needed to go through that reseller instead of Aruba self. It is hard to judge the capabilities of Aruba support directly.  

We had Aruba and we just replaced it with Juniper Mist a few weeks ago (September 2020). The AI-driven management solutions from Juniper Mist suits our business more than the Aruba solution we used before. I think Aruba did the work we needed before, but better management is the reason why we moved over to Juniper Mist.  

Before Aruba, we worked with HP Colubris. We stopped using the HP Colubris solution because HP no longer provided it. That is what happened.  

Aruba is comparable to competing solutions when it comes to price. I am going to say that the support pricing for Juniper Mist is higher than Aruba. I think that is because Juniper is more of a cloud model than Aruba.  

You do also have a cloud solution from Aruba called Aruba Central, but I have not compared prices for that.  

The advice that I would give to someone considering Aruba as a wireless solution would be to look into the Aruba Central cloud solution that they are offering right now. I think we are at a time of brand control that needs to be managed and needs to be supported. I think that working with a cloud-based solution is a better option than on-premises solutions.  

I think what is more important than a particular tool is that you also have the depth of wireless knowledge to really be able to competently manage such environments.  

On a scale from one to ten (where one is the worst and ten is the best), I would rate this product as a seven-out-of-ten. To improve on that score they would have to make Aruba more available to cloud management. They just recently started with Aruba Central and they are not as far along as Juniper Mist is with having a mature cloud solution.  

The problem for Aruba is that Juniper Mist is a new product without a longer legacy. They can start from ground zero. Aruba needs to support the older controller-based models and that may slow them down when it comes to development.  

I am a system integrator and Aruba Wireless is one of the network infrastructure products that I have experience with. We have customers using versions all the way from AP-100 to AP-535.

We have these devices in many industries, with a focus on educational institutions.

The most valuable feature is the client match. This feature continually monitors the client and provides automatic load-balancing, as well as other advanced features.

Improvements to the GUI, such as being able to search in the Mobility Master, would be nice. It is hard to find and provision APs when you have a substantial install base.

I have been using Aruba Wireless since 2007.

The stability has been great.

We haven't had any trouble with scalability. 75% of our clients are using Aruba Wireless.

I have a lot of experience with wireless networking products from Aruba and Juniper. I also have some experience with Ruckus.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward and the deployment is quick. With our experience, it is pretty easy to do.

We integrate Aruba Wireless and other devices for our customers.

My advice for anybody who is considering Aruba Wireless is to try it. If you try it then you're going to like it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

We are using different versions depending on the customer. We have about 400 or 500 customers. Some of them are Aruba, some of them have other technologies. Different versions are deployed all over. We use it as a wireless device manager where appropriate.  

There are only so many features in Wireless controllers. The fact that Aruba has a virtual controller onboard the internet access points makes it cheaper than to buy Aruba Central licenses or Meraki Cloud licenses. That probably makes it most valuable.  

Aruba Wireless is among the leaders in the market. We are not talking about basic access points. As a leader, they keep ahead of the field.  

We have been using it for a year-and-a-half.  

The stability is very good.  

It is very scalable.  

The technical support is good. My impression is that pre-sale support is very good with Aruba. Their global presence is important. I do not have to deal with any other technical support because they have a follow-the-sun type of system that uses different support teams. When I ask for support, we get it and we get it during regular business hours. I never phoned anywhere else but the North American team. They are good and responsive.  

Installation is pretty straight forward.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate Aruba wireless eight-out-of-ten. Nobody would get a ten.  

The primary use we have for the product is for users' corporate mobile access.  

The most valuable feature is the fact that it can work with many devices. It supports everything that we need it to. Whatever features are required from an enterprise standard, it supports all of them. The main advantage is broad device support.  

The area that has the most room for improvement is upgrades. What we have seen many times now is that new releases tend to have bugs. Sometimes the bugs are a little bad and cause some undesirable issues. The new code in the upgrades or something leads to conflicts. I would say testing releases before making them available is one of the areas which Aruba needs to improve most with the wireless product. More comprehensive testing is required for a better, more reliable end-user experience.  

It is not necessarily testing more often, it is just for new releases. The testing they need to do is to work more closely with different environments and take notice of where issues tend to occur. They should have some idea of what environments are experiencing issues more often by now because of which companies are reporting the issues. They can make compensations for testing in those environments.  

I do not have any new features that the product requires off the top of my head. I think that more than improving the product, there are management portfolios and other peripheral things that could be better integrated. But just doing better testing is the main improvement that they need to make.  

We have been using Aruba Wireless for between seven and eight years now.  

Aruba Wireless has been a stable solution for us. Once it was set up correctly it was fine. We had some initial hiccups. We still have issues with upgrades sometimes. Except for mostly minor issues, it has been a good solution.  

Aruba Wireless is easily scaled between a lot of devices and a lot of endpoints. When we decided to use it as our solution we had planned to use it exactly for its ability to scale. We went through a massive scaling and did not have issues with devices and endpoints.  

Right now we have 30,000 users and around 45,000 devices between those users. It does not seem that there are many limitations for scaling the product's use.  

Technical support is good. The only issue we have had with them is that we often have to be referred to their engineering response team. That situation actually happens most of the time. On the other hand, we do not need to use support very often.  

So, yes, we get support for the product and we eventually get the solution we need, but most of the time it gets referred to their engineering team to get the complete solution. Overall, the support is pretty good.  

The initial setup was a little bit complex because our environment is complex. Because of that, I would say the initial setup was complex. It may not be as complex for other companies.  

It took almost a year for deployment. But there are two sides to the setup. One is the product is good and it can be configured to do what we need. But our environment was complex because it involves some legacy devices and some really advanced new devices and technologies as well. It is good that the product is able to support both of those needs.  

We have a couple of IT specialists, one architect, and a development operations engineer for deploying the updates and maintaining the solution. In total, it is around four or five people who maintain the product. Not everyone needs to be dedicated to it full-time.  

The advice that I would give to others who are looking into implementing Aruba starts with that it is a good product. It has some really good features. But the other reality is that you might need to be prepared to face some hiccups with any upgrades and with the setup.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate the Aruba Wireless solution as a seven-point-five out of ten. Because of the upgrade issues and the persistence of those, I would rate it a seven.  

Aruba is moving to the cloud platform model. We are presenting solutions using Aruba Central to clients for the management of their infrastructure. The majority of the implementations we have are still currently are on-premises. Customers now are slowly implementing cloud solutions for Aruba. We have 80% on-premises and 20% migrating to the cloud version of the solution.  

With Aruba Central, we can manage controllers, EAPs (Employee Assistance Programs), switches, et cetera. Everything in one place. So we can manage anything we need to using Aruba. Aruba on-premises wireless is something we use for education. It is mostly implemented in schools and in universities. We use it to establish APs (Access Points)  around the campus to make sure there is coverage campus-wide. Then they have mobility controllers on-premises that control all the infrastructure.  

Another use case is for companies that have branches from the data centers. At the prime location, they have APs powered within the company and Mobility Masters in the data center. The Mobility Masters cluster-connect to the mobility controllers and then control all the APs and all the wireless infrastructure. Then we have links connecting the branches. On the branches, we have small mobility controllers that feed all the information to and from Mobility Masters. That is, the Mobility Masters connect to mobility controllers and then the mobility controllers connect to the APs.  

Portugal is a small country and our smallest companies always have EAPs. EAPs are a version of a solution from Aruba that the NAC (Network Access Control) AP has inside a virtual controller. These NAC APs control all the other APs.  

It gives us a reliable, mature solution that we can roll out to our clients.  

Wireless technologies, relatively speaking, are a new solution. The technical guys from Aruba are very good. The support is very good. It is very easy to implement the product. Another solution that Aruba has is the NAC and the ClearPass. ClearPass is a good solution for additional security of access points and it is integrated so it is very easy to deploy. It is very interactive and not so analytic as other solutions so, in my opinion. Aruba is a very good company — very good technology-wise — and they make very useful products.  

Perhaps one of the things that I think Aruba can improve on is developing their current information channels. Aruba has a lot of information available about their products and to find the information you need is not always so easy. It is more complicated than it should be. I think that they are great and do have a lot of information available — probably all the information that any user really needs to do things themselves. They are doing things well and trying to do things in the right way. They should just improve more on the organization and searchability of the information to make it easier to find what you are looking for.  

I am with the sales service for Arrow, Portugal which is a solutions company. My role is to help the partners in designing solutions. I am working with Aruba products as a partner and reseller for three years now.  

Aruba Wireless is stable. Very stable. Because Aruba has already been around for more than 10 years or so, it is a mature product and a very stable product. If there is a problem, the support team is very good with working through the problems. When a client wants a new version, we have confidence in Aruba that everything has already tested and we have access to stable versions of the release. We have access to all the information for the versions whether they are the old ones or the new ones.  

My impressions about the scalability and the product is that it is highly scalable. You can start with a low quantity of access points — as low as one installation — and then scale it to thousands if you have to. You can do the upgrades in the mobility controllers to allow the growth of the infrastructure. Because of the way it is created, it is highly scalable and highly reliable.  

Of course, we have plans to scale our own usage of the product. Because we work as a value-added distributor of Aruba in Portugal, we have to meet the needs of our client base which is growing all the time. We have plans to increase the implementation of the product in our market to meet those demands. It is partly because we are working with a superior product like Aruba that we are growing in our market.  

The Aruba technical support team is very good. They are very skilled people and can help you with the support you need when it comes to their products. They are very good at turning around a response within 24 hours. It is fast and helpful.  

In my experience the initial setup of the Aruba EAP solution is straightforward. We can call on all the APs and then you have everything connected. Now they also have a Soho gateway solution that it is integrated. It is very easy to turn on this solution. I can install the Soho add-on instantly for the Aruba solution. I think that they are doing very well to keep the customer in mind when building and testing their products for ease of setup and use.  

Our deployment did not take a very long time. Even initially. For clients, the deployment takes more or less time than ours. It depends on the size of the implementation. If you have to do only 10 APs in a small deployment, it can take only two or three days to complete the whole thing. If you have a bigger implementation, it depends on the size of the project. It could take weeks for the deployment if it is a very large one.  

We did not have to use an integrator, reseller, or consultant for our deployment. We could do that ourselves. But we do work with all the integrators in Portugal because we help them to sell the solution so that they can implement it for the clients. We help them sell the product and then they do the deployments.  

The advice I would give to a customer that wants to implement this product is that they must have good support from a product partner. Try to find a certified partner to do the job of planning and implementation. This should be a certified HP partner to do the job as Aruba is an HP company. Choose the right partner, the right technical guy, and the right company to implement the solution for you. It will make sure you have the solution deployed in the way you need it to be done to fit your needs and expectations. That is the most important thing that I can think of.  

On a scale from one to ten where one is the worst and ten is the best, I would rate this product as a nine-and-a-half.