We performed a comparison between Aruba Instant On Access Points and Cisco Wireless based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI.
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The simplicity is great."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The solution is stable."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"Regarding access points, the customer typically considers low-cost plans, and Ruckus Unleashed Access Points are commonly used. These access points are managed through the Microsoft console and can be accessed either with or without ports. The management is done through a controller. The main benefits customers see include cost-effectiveness, especially for those with budget constraints. Aruba, in particular, provides a good user experience. Some customers might choose Huawei, but enterprise access points are also considered. Additionally, the unified access point capabilities are valuable, allowing management from the same account. However, there is a limitation of twenty-five access points, and if a customer requires more, they need to create another site or account. If the customer exceeds twenty-five access points, they need to generate another site or virtual business to manage additional access points, as the external number is limited to twenty-five."
"It's super user-friendly."
"The initial setup is easy."
"The configuration is very simple."
"The solution is scalable."
"The product is scalable. It has 20 users."
"It's really easy to set up. And, you don't have to pay for the cloud solution. That's really interesting for our clients. And the other thing is, the roaming is also quite good."
"The coverage Aruba provides across the physical area is much better. Most probably because of the new technology, the 4x4 antenna, and everything around it. It's just a much better, easier to use, and easier to manage product."
"The ability to deploy wireless access points with templates."
"Good manageability, and stability."
"The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software."
"It integrates with Cisco Adaptive Security Appliance (ASA)."
"The integration with Cisco ISE is good, and together we use them to provide services."
"Stable and scalable with good technical support."
"It is an extremely stable and scalable solution. Its documentation and support are also very good."
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"The tool is priced high."
"It's only suitable for smaller offices. It doesn't scale well."
"The limited functionality of the mobile app restricts its use primarily to small and medium-sized setups, making it less suitable for enterprise-level solutions."
"The solution can be more integrated with other brands."
"When I first deployed the solution, I couldn't use a tagged VLAN for the management. It might already have been fixed in a recent firmware upgrade."
"The solution's range could be better."
"I would like to see a feature that blocks, increases, or decreases bandwidth capacity for devices."
"The product's machine or equipment can cater to around 20 connections and cannot go beyond 50 simultaneous connections, because of which I think the tool's scalability is limited."
"If needs to provide more visibility. It can detect and do it, but as technicians we don't have a lot of visibility into seeing exactly what's happening. It doesn't give us a lot of log information for us to troubleshoot. They probably have additional software you need to purchase to get that kind of information. But I think not all companies can afford additional software to see those kinds of details. So if the wireless controller already had, built-in, those types of things for the technician or wireless engineer, it would be more attractive for the end-user."
"The classic Cisco wireless interface is difficult for users to learn."
"In Latin America, Cisco is very expensive in comparison to other technologies."
"The web interface for Cisco controllers could be better. It could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have to remember how to access some functionalities or how to enable or execute some functions. If it were more user-friendly it would save time."
"Requires a firewall body to improve security."
"Even though the tool offers a cloud-based central management option, the product needs to work on improving the security part a bit since it is an area of concern."
"What my company doesn't like about the product is related to the coverage it provides to access points, an area which is one of the most important ones for us."
"It's very scalable, but when you shift gears sometimes, you have to do more work than people anticipate."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
More Aruba Instant On Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Instant On Access Points is ranked 10th in Wireless LAN with 18 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 145 reviews. Aruba Instant On Access Points is rated 8.4, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Instant On Access Points writes "All-inclusive pricing, great for small offices, and simple to deploy and manage". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". Aruba Instant On Access Points is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Aruba Instant, Cambium Networks Wireless LAN and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Omada Access Points. See our Aruba Instant On Access Points vs. Cisco Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless LAN reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
