"It has very flexible features."
"All features are useful for me. It lets me perform some specific configurations depending on the site or the client. All WAN features are valuable."
"Aruba Wireless is easily scaled between a lot of devices and a lot of endpoints. When we decided to use it as our solution, we had planned to use it exactly for its ability to scale."
"Overall, it's a very strong solution."
"Aruba is an industry leader. The hardware is on par, and its performance is also on par with anybody else. The Aruba brand really only focuses on wireless, so they're not competing their R&D for switching data center products and cloud security. They're really focused on that and their underlying key pieces. They provide a role-based authentication that is native to the controller. A lot of other systems don't do that. They won't provide you the ability to basically have everybody join the network, regardless of whether or not they share the same network space, the SSID, or the wireless LAN. You can segment it down to a specific user role based on any kind of attributes that you like. That's their differentiator. If you need per user, per device, or per port segmentation, you can get that with Aruba. There isn't another vendor who does it."
"The most valuable feature is the fact that it can work with many devices. It supports everything that we need it to."
"It is easy to install and deploy."
"The functionality is very high and we can properly meet the clients' requirements."
"It is a reliable and robust solution. Access and Mobility Groups are useful. We don't use anything very fancy."
"The ability to make different types of networks, such as land networks, is the most valuable part of the solution."
"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."
"It's very easy to configure the access points."
"It is good, and it works."
"I like that Cisco Wireless is easy to implement. If you get stuck with any issues, they have ample documentation on the internet. It's easy to implement, and Cisco documentation is easily accessible."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"Most of the access points don't include the chargers."
"There needs to be better visibility on the day-to-day monitoring."
"I believe more security options are needed."
"The pricing could always be better."
"A lot of the access point commands are in the command line interface, versus being in the GUI."
"The network times for protocol synchronization can be improved."
"The upgrades tend to be buggy and better testing is needed before they are released."
"When we connect to Wi-Fi devices it could be easier because sometimes, it takes a lot of time to complete."
"An expensive solution that small companies cannot afford."
"The solution is stable but it could be improved. However, this could be because there are not enough APs."
"The interface could be better."
"There should be an option for a wireless bridge that can be used to join two access points."
"This solution is very expensive, which means we often have to go for cheaper options instead."
"If they could offer better coverage, we'd be much happier."
"The solution could improve by having more advanced features, such as AI that is able to do diagnosis on the network or detect incorrect configurations and is able to tell you what is the recommended practice. Additionally, it would be a benefit to have smart antennas that are able to track your movement, Wi-Fi 6 support, better transfer rates, low latency, stronger signals that can penetrate thick walls, and zero packet losses."
"The reporting of the product could be improved. When I needed to troubleshoot, I couldn't get sufficient information from the controller."
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 20 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 68 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.0, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "Overall a good product that provides role-based authentication native to the controller, but has code stability issues". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Robust with a good level of performance and very helpful technical support". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless, Mist Access Points and Fortinet FortiWLM, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN, Fortinet FortiWLM and Mist 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.