Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs Ruckus Wireless WAN comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Feb 4, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Categories and Ranking

Aruba Networks Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
5th
Average Rating
8.4
Reviews Sentiment
7.4
Number of Reviews
49
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ruckus Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
2nd
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
56
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of May 2025, in the Wireless WAN category, the mindshare of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is 4.0%, up from 1.8% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ruckus Wireless WAN is 36.6%, down from 37.3% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless WAN
 

Featured Reviews

Joseph Colly - PeerSpot reviewer
Reasonably priced and offers a good GUI
The product is very scalable. When it comes to some schools, they start with the solution's proof of concept in certain sections. My company aims to improve the throughputs in the schools where the product is installed. If the rest of the School wants the product, it is easy to set up the solution. My company uses Aruba Networks Wireless WAN for schools and warehouses but not in the retail sector. The product offers reliability and uptime twenty-four hours and seven days a week. My company gets notified if the reliability offered by the product goes down. My company also gets notified if we are getting hacked.
Udit Narayan - PeerSpot reviewer
Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement
In Cisco, there is a configuration where it automatically switches from the 2.4 GHz to 5.2 GHz frequency. But with Ruckus, usually, we need to manually define whether we want to use the 2.4 GHz or 5.2 GHz. Another point is that its penetration power is low when we are using it in any location with more walls, as the signal strength diminishes. So, the signal strength and the penetration power of the signal should be improved. It is not like Cisco. We are using Cisco APs also, but Cisco APs perform better when we compare them with Ruckus. In future releases, I would like to see automatic switching between 2.4 GHz and 5.2 GHz frequencies. We should not have to set it manually. It should automatically change its frequency based on the load. For example, if the number of users increases, then its frequency should change automatically, switching to the less congested band.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"It integrates with the Aruba portfolio very easily, and it's a vendor-agnostic solution, and that's brilliant."
"The most valuable feature is the ease of setup and deployment."
"From the performance perspective, I'm happy with the solution. Also, from the technical side, it seems to be pretty good."
"What I like most about Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is seamless integration from an endpoint perspective. Another valuable feature of the product is that it supports certificate-based authentication."
"The solution is overall a great product. The stability is one of the best aspects of it. It's also useful in helping control multiple access points. You don't need to have a physical controller like other brands."
"I appreciate the ease of deployment and management through the centralized console."
"I like the way that it integrates with the ClearPass security system on-site."
"The initial setup of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN can be done quickly, and everything functions smoothly."
"The strongest point for Ruckus has always been the radio hardware."
"The best feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN apart from its seamless roaming feature where you roam beautifully on the network is its analytics tool that gives you so much insight into your deployment, so it has become more of a business intelligence type of tool as well. I also like that Ruckus Networks, in terms of WiFi security issues on the WiFi protocols, is also the first company to give you notices of security issues, and also the first to provide patches for those issues. Ruckus Wireless WAN is very proactive and much, much faster than Cisco, Aruba, and Meraki."
"The tool is friendly to use."
"The ratio of highest quality to value is the most valuable."
"Tech support is good."
"One of its notable advantages lies in the superior performance of its antennas and radios."
"I have seen a good return on investment from the use of the product."
"The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology."
 

Cons

"It is a little bit cumbersome to configure. If you're designing a WLAN and you want to do and cover certain types of clients, you really have to know different settings and how they interact with one another. If they could automate that so that if you are designing for one type of equipment, you could, in essence, run a wizard. That would certainly save on a lot of calls to tech support."
"We have had stability issues with some types of portable devices."
"Aruba Networks Wireless WAN could improve the solution availability. The selection of mounting hardware for the various radios is limited and poor. Often, you have to create and manufacture your own mounting hardware in certain situations."
"The solution has bugs. It really has bugs, and you have to wait until it happens, then you realize it."
"The initial setup is complex."
"From the commercial-side the pricing side is fine but in other aspects, it could be lowered."
"The product offers a feature that pinpoints where the devices are to help users find them easily if they want to know where a laptop or tablet is, but it is a feature that needs improvements due to some shortcomings."
"The solution would be improved with a better interface."
"The product does not offer a cloud version. I am waiting for the cloud version of the product to be introduced."
"The product needs to improve its latency and performance."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
"This product needs a point-to-point, bridge solution."
"So far, I find Ruckus Wireless WAN okay in terms of the technology and existing business network, but licensing could be more flexible, especially the IoT license that was changed to adapt to the IoT Controller and sensor subscription. The previous licensing method for Ruckus Wireless WAN was better. In my opinion, it wasn't a good decision to change it because the customer prefers the previous licensing over the current licensing. It's not only about the money in terms of licensing, but also about flexibility. The latest license change isn't as flexible. I also found the cloud solution not partner-friendly, so that could also be improved. Another area for improvement in Ruckus Wireless WAN is answering partner requests because currently, it doesn't seem easy for them. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is the AP having its MQTT forwarder. Ruckus Wireless WAN AP supports IoT modules now and to use the IoT modules, you need all IoT data to pass through the IoT Controller. If I could forward that IoT data directly to my environment, similar to what you can do with other solutions, that would be great."
"Ruckus Unleashed App has areas with certain shortcomings where improvements are required."
"The GUI interface of Ruckus Wireless WAN could be more usable, especially the drag-and-drop feature."
"Technical support is something that needs to be improved."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is expensive."
"Aruba Wireless comes with the controller."
"The price of this solution is better than some other vendors."
"Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is pretty cost-efficient than Cisco ISE when my company did a PO, but for a single-party tender, its pricing was on the higher side, so it depends. I rate the pricing for Aruba Networks Wireless WAN as six out of ten."
"The product's price is within range since it has a lower price."
"Licensing fees are paid on a yearly basis."
"With some vendors, the access point is not manageable anymore if you don't maintain the license. It's more or less a doorstop because you can't configure and control it. You can't troubleshoot it unless you maintain the license. That's not true with Aruba."
"It is more affordable than Cisco."
"The price of Ruckus Wireless WAN is in the middle price range compared to competitors. You will find Cisco is the most expensive, the second is HPE and Aruba, and the third is Ruckus Wireless WAN. You then have all the follower solutions."
"On a scale from one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive, I rate the solution's pricing a six out of ten."
"Compared to big brands, the tool is quite competitively priced."
"Here in India, Ruckus is chosen often because it is priced low."
"It's expensive but you get more coverage."
"This product is worth the money that is spent on licensing fees."
"This solution offers a yearly subscription. The price is not high, other solutions are much higher than Ruckus."
"I rate the tool's pricing a seven out of ten."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
11%
Government
10%
Real Estate/Law Firm
10%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Comms Service Provider
15%
Computer Software Company
10%
Financial Services Firm
8%
Educational Organization
6%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

Do you recommend Aruba Network Wireless WAN?
I recommend Aruba Networks Wireless WAN. I have been using Aruba for approximately a decade. It has a great centralized management system, which means we don’t need wireless LAN controllers at ever...
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Aruba Networks Wireless WAN?
I am not paying anything more apart from the licensing. The only thing I am paying for is the implementation cost.
Is Ubiquiti Wireless better than Ruckus Wireless WAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up and is an excellent option for small businesses, offering enterprise features for a one-time fee and no ongoing licensing fees. Ubiquiti Wireless is ve...
What do you like most about Ruckus Wireless WAN?
Ruckus Wireless WAN is an easy-to-use solution.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Ruckus Wireless WAN?
The price is always on the higher side, which impacts the perception of return on investment.
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

The Pittsburgh Golf Club, Rio Rancho Public Schools, Amwaj Rotana - Jumeirah Beach Residence - Dubai, Trevecca Nazarene University
American University of Sharjah, Dordt College, Drew University, Lamar University, Raroa School
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN and other solutions. Updated: April 2025.
849,963 professionals have used our research since 2012.