Cisco Wireless Reviews

We primarily use the solution for the internal network connection.

The management solutions the product has on offer are the most valuable aspects of the solution. It makes everything easy to manage from the perspective of an IT administrator.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The solution can scale well.

We've found the product to be very stable and quite reliable.

So far, we've found that the product offers everything we need it to.

I don't see any features that are really lacking.

The technical support could be better. They aren't as helpful as they need to be when we run into issues.

I've been using the solution for the last ten years at this point. It's been about a decade. We've used it for quite a long time now.

The solution is quite stable. It doesn't crash or freeze. There aren't bugs or glitches.

The solution is pretty scalable. If a company needs to expand it, they can do so fairly easily. It's not hard.

We have between 300 to 400 people on the solution currently.

We aren't fully satisfied with technical support at this time. They are getting better, however, they need to improve their services still.

The implementation process is not complex at all. it's very straightforward. We didn't face any issues.

The deployment process was also very quick. It didn't take long to have everything up and running.

Our procurement team handles the contracts for this solution. Therefore, I don't have any insights into pricing.

We're just end-users. We don't have a business relationship with Cisco.

Currently, just doing the upgrade. I'm just doing the upgrade in order to have Wi-Fi 6 enabled, which is the new technology. 

I would recommend the solution to others.

Overall, I would rate the solution nine out of ten. We've been pretty happy with it.

We are implementing Cisco Wireless in various environments including hospitality (controller-based deployment along with room AP in 90+ room property), and corporate (both standalone and controller-based).

The wireless system has been integrated into the hotspot for guest access and enterprise authentication has been used for the employees. For authentication, both the inbuilt database and integration to FreeRADIUS has been used. We have also used AD in the corporate environment for authentication. The controller has been deployed in HA.

It has helped to provide mobility with committed throughput and performance.

Additionally, Cisco wireless solutions are very stable. This, with its rugged nature, has helped for overall efficiencies in information processing and daily operations.

It has enhanced the security of the enterprise and has given single-pane visibility for network monitoring.

It has provided excellent mobility and load balancing of the wireless endpoints to various APs, based on the built-in algorithms, both in 2.4 GHz and 5.8 GHz.

The most valuable features are the controller, single pane for the configuration, as well as the operation and monitoring of the wireless system.

Other important features are the detection of the rough AP, programmable API, network analytics, and the RF planning tool.

The product is very stable. The infrastructure is scalable and very durable.

With excellent support from the Cisco support team, this solution can be deployed in no time.

It is easy to troubleshoot and zone-based profiling is another excellent feature. Auto power calibration between AP sensing the environment is also a valuable feature. 

The regulatory domain seems to be hardcoded into the system and we need a simple way to change it in wireless APs.

Power level improvements and increased antenna dBi are needed when compared to other competitor vendors like Ruckus and HP Aruba.

The product pricing should be competitive compared to other vendors, as many products are coming up with good features like Cambium, Edge, and Core.

The controller pricing is high compared to other vendors like Ruckus. Pricing should be lowered to target the SMB market, where many other vendors have dominance. 

We have been using Cisco Wireless for 10 years.

The stability is excellent.

Cisco Wireless is very much Scalable, based on the forecast you have and the controller you choose. It's just about adding the license.

The technical support is excellent.

We have been using other products like Cambium, Ruckus, and HP. Before we implement Cisco, we had read a lot of reviews of its stability and durability, and indeed, it was true.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The installation team was highly skilled and certified.

The ROI is excellent.

The pricing depends on the requirement, so proper planning and an RF analysis help to properly size the solution and get the best pricing.

We previously evaluated Cambium and Rukus.

My advice is that this product should be the first choice to adopt when deploying a wireless solution. If cost is a factor then proper sizing will help to reduce it.

The FlexConnect feature is the most valuable.

It would be great if it is compatible with other products.

I have been using this solution for almost six years.

Until now, it has been stable in spite of some upgrades.

It is scalable. Our clients are large companies.

Their technical support is great.

We worked with Cisco Prime and Cisco Controller.

The initial setup was quite straightforward.

It is quite simple. Even if you are not a wireless network expert, you will be able to use it by doing some research. It is not difficult or super complex.

I would rate Cisco Wireless a nine out of ten. I am satisfied with this solution.

We have twenty switches in our corporate office.

The most valuable features are that it is easy to install and the range is good.

The price should be reduced. It should be cheaper.

I have been using this solution for five years.

We have upgraded to the newest version.

It's a stable product.

We have close to 600 users in our organization who are using this solutoin.

I do not have experience with technical support. We have not had to contact them.

Previously, we did not use another solution.

It's easy to install. 

It can take 15 to 20 minutes to complete the installation.

I completed the installation myself.

We have a team of three to maintain this product.

This is an expensive product.

We plan to continue our usage of this product and I would recommend it to others.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

The mobility that it provides is really helpful. It's one full network of about 15 APs and they're all connected together; the users can move seamlessly between them.

Overall, it's a pretty good solution; however, it's end-of-life, it will be end-of-support in the next two years. The APs are also end-of-life. I was considering upgrading this year, however, we're planning to move to a new office and I don't want to buy new equipment just to install it in our current office, and then have to dismantle everything and move it to the new office. We just want to buy something that is useful for us.

The model that we have is about eight or ten years old; I'm sure the marketplace has changed a lot since then. It's good but outdated, there are other features that could be better.

The latest models, of course, have better WiFi capabilities. Our access points support 2.4 and 5 GHz. We're looking for the new AX or AC models for WiFi. I believe there is more speed with those kinds of connections.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for about three years.

It's stable. It's working fine. There are some issues regarding moving the equipment. Otherwise, every three months or so we have an AP that hangs and we just restart it, that's it. Otherwise, everything's working fine.

We haven't contacted support from Cisco.

We have some other access points, but they are normal, standard APs. For our branch office, we use fat APs, just normal wireless outlets from off-the-shelf, like D-Link and so on. 

I haven't set them up myself. There was an IT team before I started administering this network and they set up everything before me. I just received the network as it is. I just added the APs and moved them from one area to another.

Cisco Wireless is good. On a scale from one to ten, I would give them a rating of seven, although to give a more accurate rating, I would need to experience something else to compare it to. I'm considering sticking with Cisco, unless I find other models that can give better performance. Cisco has a few types of models: the standard Cisco, the normal Cisco, and the Meraki one. I'm not sure if Meraki would be a better solution for us, or if the standard Cisco Wireless controller would be better. That's why I went to your website — to find other solutions and read comparisons about them.

I like many of the features that Cisco Wireless has to offer.

Code stability is something that needs to be improved.

I have been working with Cisco Wireless for 10 years.

The technical support is fine.

The price of this product is reasonable.

My advice for anybody who is implementing Cisco Wireless is that they need to know the products. There are a lot of features that you can turn on and off, so they need to know the product itself. It's not as simple as it seems.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use it for users within the company. We have a separate network for them. We have another network for outside people. 

It is good, and it works.

It requires a few tweaks in order to stabilize it. Its portal is complex. Cisco solutions are complex in general.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for about ten years.

We have to do a few tweaks in order to stabilize it. We have tweaked its configuration through their support center, and we even got a third-party vendor out here to kind of take a look at it, which improved it a little but not a hundred percent. We have several users who get dropped from the Wi-Fi every once in a while. APs also don't typically work. They just stop working. We have to reboot them, and they magically work. 

With all the testing that we have done with Aruba for the last six to seven months, we have not had this problem. This is one of the key points why we are switching over.

It is scalable. Pre pandemic, we probably had about 1,100 people. Post pandemic, we probably have a quarter of that because most people work from home now.

They have been supportive. We have opened tickets, and we got decent support. They are still not perfect in their support. 

It does take time to get through to them unless it is a down situation, which we really never had. Wireless is not a major asset when it comes to the network because most people are tethered into the local area network. It sometimes takes an hour or two for the tickets to get assigned. We have also opened support tickets with Aruba, and the ticket gets assigned and resolved within ten minutes. Aruba's technical support is definitely more responsive.

I wasn't here when they installed it, but I'm sure it was complex.

Cost is one of the reasons why we are switching to Aruba. Aruba is significantly lower than Cisco in price. 

We do the licensing on a three-year basis. Cisco makes licensing very difficult.

I would recommend Cisco Wireless based on the needs. You probably need a certification in order to run it effectively. If you are going to do it, do it, but just be aware of the complexity of their solutions. It is good, and it works. It is not a bad product, but they make licensing very difficult. It also takes a little while to get hold of somebody in technical support as compared to other vendors.

We are going to swap Cisco Wireless with the Aruba platform because of better stability, price, and technical support.

I would rate Cisco Wireless a seven out of ten.

We have been using Cisco wireless for more than five years.

This product has a long life and you don't have any issues with it.

We are very comfortable with the access points and Wi-Fi connectivity.

There needs to be an access point that is compact and more suitable for small and medium-sized businesses.

We need an access point that can be easily managed in a big industry. As it is now, in a large organization, we would require perhaps 20 or 30 access points. Instead of this, if we had a high-range access point that is also cost-effective then it would work well.

We have been using Cisco Wireless for five years. The model that we are using is now at end-of-life and we no longer have support from Cisco.

Stability-wise, this is a good solution and the majority of people in the industry prefer Cisco and Aruba devices.

This is a scalable product.

In general, Cisco's technical support is very good. They will replace hardware if needed. However, based on the locality, the support may need improvement. 

If you have knowledge of Cisco solutions then the initial setup is easy. However, if you don't have the knowledge then it's very difficult and you need to ask for support from a third-party.

The deployment will take a week.

Some of our customers use Cisco Wireless, whereas others use Aruba. It is normally an issue of the quality of the local support team. People prefer the support of one vendor over another, which differs depending on the locale.

If anybody asks me, I would recommend a Cisco device. When you consider all of the LAN and wireless features, everything is good. Cisco is now customizing products based on customer requirements, and they are also cost-effective.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.