We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When comparing Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless, it is evident that Cisco Wireless is the more popular choice. While both have great features, users of Cisco Wireless seem to find fewer things lacking with it and are generally satisfied. In regards to service and support as well, Cisco users are happy with the service they receive. Users do feel that it is an expensive solution, however.
"The solution is stable."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The simplicity is great."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"The product has been pretty stable...The product is scalable."
"The wireless controller and access points are valuable features."
"Setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable features of Aruba Wireless are the seamless feature and the concurrent user."
"We like the centralized configuration and monitoring."
"One advantage is the built-in Zigbee-based IoT functionality. You don't need an additional dongle to enable that option."
"Aruba Wireless does not have too many distinguishing feature sets. However, tunneling is more flexible in this solution than other solutions, such as Ruckus."
"The stability is great. It's very reliable."
"The integration is great."
"The most valuable features are mobility and security."
"Cisco Wireless is easy to use."
"The solution is scalable."
"Creating policies is simple."
"Cisco's support team is the best in the industry."
"From my experience, I have found Cisco Wireless to be scalable."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The price could be better."
"The solution is expensive."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"I would like to see a faster web interface in the controller and more troubleshooting tools, including real-time troubleshooting tools."
"Configuration for this solution could be made easier, so people could benefit from being able to configure it within a quicker amount of time."
"Aruba Wireless is a good product, but it still has some issues, especially at the beginning, where there's inconsistent syncing between the cloud and the APs. Sometimes, there's also a little lag when accessing the query."
"The solution's GUI for configuration could be better."
"The bad things about the product are the price, the information about the product, and the time it takes to deliver the product."
"Sometimes the configuration is difficult."
"We needed the help of network consultants to complete the setup for us."
"We need security features to recognize the traffic source and to apply Zero Trust security."
"There is no technology without room for improvement. The main setback with Cisco solutions, not only with Cisco Wireless, is having to update the OS manually. We are now migrating to Miraki, so we've been able to work that out."
"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."
"In the next release, they should add a better reporting feature. The reporting will tell you if you have a problem. That will make the diagnostics easier."
"The solution doesn't have much coverage area."
"Cisco won't work with any other vendors. That is a significant problem with Cisco."
"The current issue with Cisco is I don't have centralized management."
"And from an administration point of view, it is a very tedious job to check on each and every control. We have around 30 or 40 controls in our network."
"There are some features I would like to have in Cisco Wireless, such as Telemetry and other IoT. However, they are available in the new version of the solution."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 50 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 33 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.2, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "Simple to install, easy to use, and cost-effective". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Integrates with ISE, and is secure, reliable, and easy to deploy". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Mist AI and Cloud and ExtremeWireless, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Mist AI and Cloud and NETGEAR Insight Access Points. See our Aruba Wireless 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.
On the most basic level, Cisco Wireless can offer a rather straightforward initial setup. In the span of about three hours, the basic framework can be set up. Step-by-step instructions are available to ease the deployment of the Cisco wireless network. A small business will now be able to make use of this wireless product without being worried about having to make a massive investment of either time or resources. This peace of mind extends to the actual maintenance of the product as well. Cisco wireless’s network does not require very much in the way of maintenance. It does require occasional upgrades to keep it running smoothly, but other than that, a team tasked with maintaining it has very little to worry about. Organizations of all sizes will be able to benefit from both of these aspects of Cisco wireless’s design.
Cisco wireless provides a very robust service that will continue to run over long periods of time and under heavy usage. Furthermore, the teams that are responsible for assisting users and resolving any potential issues that may arise are highly professional. These are two additional features that make Cisco wireless a valuable product. The wireless service is capable of running for years without any real need for replacements to be made to the hardware.
Although no system is perfect, Cisco’s Wireless network shows that products can still be made to last. Long spans of time can pass without issues arising. When they do, Cisco’s technical support team is well-equipped to help handle it. They respond quickly to inquiries and they are extremely knowledgeable. They bring the kind of professionalism that one would hope to have in a product’s support team.
Aruba Wireless can support many devices and provide the features that one would expect for this type of product. It is relatively cheap when compared to other products like Cisco Wireless. For that relatively cheap price, Aruba offers hardware whose performance can match anything offered by its competitors. It advertises what it can do and follows through with its promises. It is also very easy to configure. However, they do not guide users in different industries through the best practices that they should be employing when using Aruba Wireless.
Conclusion
Cisco Wireless offers an effective service. In terms of cost it is more expensive than Aruba Wireless. They both have a lot to offer. The price tag might just be the deciding factor.
Aruba is our choice for our WIFI solution as Aruba has a lot of features that can do the same with Meraki.
Aruba is saving costs vs Meraki in a long time operation.