Cisco Wireless Reviews

I am using the Cisco Wireless WAP 300, 200, and 100 series.

Cisco Wireless always has the latest technology that supports WiFi 5 and 6.

The solution could improve by having an advanced model with a controller. Additionally, the solution could be more secure.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for approximately two years.

I have found Cisco Wireless to be stable.

The solution is scalable, it has many features for scaling that you can use to control many devices.

Cisco Wireless is good for small to medium-sized businesses.

We have approximately 100 users using this solution.

The support has been good. I have had no issues with them.

The implementation is simple.

One engineer can install the solution. We have two engineers for the support of the solution.

There is no license required to use Cisco Wireless solutions.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate Cisco Wireless an eight out of ten.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for approximately 25 years.

Cisco Wireless is scalable.

We have approximately 2,500 people using this solution in my organization.

The technical support is very good.

Positive

We were previously using Linksys many years ago but they were acquired by Cisco, and we made the migration to Cisco.

The installation is straightforward.

We have four engineers and one administrator that can do the implementation and maintenance of the solution.

We are on an annual license. The license and the hardware are expensive.

I would recommend the solution to others.

I rate Cisco Wireless an eight out of ten.

A small office at the time that needed the ability to host network services that changed daily.

• Overall cost per unit including licensing was too high for the value.
• The range of the APs was not excellent but mediocre at best. 

The ability to control any device from the cloud.

Significantly reduce the licensing fees.

Checking out alternatives right now.

Don't use Cisco Meraki. While pretty, the devices and licensing aren't worth the cost.

Mobility device support. It can provide support for real-time applications, such as VoIP and Video Conferencing over wireless infrastructure.

For industrial IT (sensors, programmed logical controllers, trains, ports, mines) and IT for offices, we can support real-time information, reducing risk for people, speeding up time to market and giving real-time access to information and communications.

This is a good product but some basic configurations were missed such as:

• The bind configuration between a physical port and an IP address
• Health check for authentication/authorization server.

Three years.

No.

No.

Seven out of 10. They are slow to answer.

Yes. We switched due to company decisions.

Complex. The solution works for beginners with basic implementations.

It is an expensive solution.

Yes, Aerohive and Aruba.

I use Cisco Wireless for wired and wireless networking.

Cisco Wireless solutions are easy to use.

In the future, I would like to have Cisco add video documentation on configuring and overall learning of how to use the solutions. For example, in such areas as, security, authentication, and load balancing.

I have been using Cisco Wireless within the past 12 months.

The solution is stable.

Cisco Wireless scalability is good.

We have approximately 500 people using this solution in my organization.

We have plans to expand the use of this solution in the future.

I have not used Cisco's technical support but I have contacted the distributor for assistance.

The initial setup was easy.

The price of Cisco Wireless is expensive and there is an additional cost for support.

I rate Cisco Wireless a nine out of ten.

We use this solution to connect to the access point and link users wirelessly to the network, and centrally manage the APs.

The performance is fantastic.

It integrates with Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA). 

The pricing could be reduced.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for five years.

Cisco Wireless is a stable product.

Cisco Wireless is scalable. We have many users. We have guests that come in who have contractors, which brings our user amount to approximately 5,000.

Previously, we have not used any other solutions.

The deployment is easy. The installation takes two or three days.

When you compare it toith standalone APs, with the introduction of the controllers, it's deployed in a split second and up and running.

Because it is integrated with Cisco ASA, we have two teams of eight people to maintain this solution.

We installed and deployed this solution ourselves.

It's expensive. The price could be cheaper.

The license is a one-time purchase.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I would rate Cisco Wireless an eight out of ten.

The primary use case for our customers is having a product that provides a solution to complex problems. We have more than 100 customers using Cisco Wireless. 

Being able to solve the complex issues of our customers with a stable solution is very valuable. The fact that it is also very flexible adds to the value. 

One of the issues with Cisco, particularly for smaller companies, is the cost. A small company can't afford to pay the price of a Cisco product. The price is a very important factor for our customers. 

I've been using this solution for about two years. 

The solution is stable. 

This solution is scalable. 

We receive great technical support from Cisco. 

The initial setup was relatively straightforward, although it took a little longer than expected. We have one person who deals with the maintenance and any issues that arise. 

I believe licensing is paid on a monthly basis. 

This is a great product and despite the high cost, I rate it a 10 out of 10 for performance. 

We provide seamless connectivity for the users in various locations. We can track a user and analyze them according to their behavior within the campus and according to their different locations. This gives us a full view of the locations that users gravitate towards and how they utilize the workspace areas within the campus.

The solution offers very good integration with a BYOD solution.

The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software.

We are looking for more interaction with end-users and need to use the engagement feature that is provided in the new series. We want interaction between the end-users and the software that we are deploying. Therefore, an integration that would use a user's mobile devices through some sort of engagement API would be a good enhancement.

We don't actually use the features to their full potential yet.  We're always exploring the features to see what we can add.

It would be great if, even if the solution is degraded, security-wise, if it could be integrated without extra overhead for the systems or wireless administrators.

I've been using the solution for 13 or 14 years now through it is different series 

The solution is very scalable using the options of the cluster-ID for the wireless. You don't have any limitations, even with one wireless controller. I haven't seen any limitations. It's very scalable and extendible. Performance-wise we can extend beyond the wireless controller through the FlexConnect feature. It's great.

On-premises, we typically have about 500 users.

Currently, our capacity is enough, so I don't foresee us expanding the solution in the near future. We'll see what happens after the COVID lockdown.

We haven't faced a huge problem from a technical standpoint. However, overall, their response to any queries has been very good overall. They are quite supportive and we've been satisfied with their level of attention.

I have only ever used Cisco.

The initial setup was simple, however, to get the full features, those performing the set up need some sort of experience, regardless of the deployment, the analysis of the location, or for the deployment for the engagement to the API.

We will be going to do that part right now. I have a feeling it will be a complex part of the process.

Deployment takes about one day or so. It doesn't take too much time.

We are an integrator. We handle the implementation for our clients.

The pricing of the solution is little expensive if you compare it to other competitors.

A long time ago, we were comparing this solution against Aruba before the acquisition to HP. We also compare other products however, the main competitor was Aruba.

We're a Cisco partner.

We use a variety of different versions of the solution, including the 800 Series, and 2800 Series. We are planning to go to the Catalyst 9000 Series soon as well. 

It's a centralized solution depending on the wireless controller and some access points have their own branches.

While not related to hardware, in relation to software capabilities, we're always looking for ways to better integrate solutions. This particular solution has been great thanks to the access technology provided. We have seamless integration with the infrastructure. The movement of the users is very easy to pinpoint. The user's onboarding onto the infrastructure is simple.

While the solution isn't perfect as a standalone, the integration capabilities on offer make it really special.

New users will really need to utilize features to get the most out of the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. There are a few features that we would like to see added in the future that would make it perfect.