We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points 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."What I like best about Aruba Wireless is that it doesn't need a controller. The product also has a GUI that's easy to navigate."
"The feature I found most valuable to customers in Aruba Wireless is not a technical feature. It's more of its image, trademark, or brand as the product is very well-known in the market, and that's a good point to offer to customers. My customers just ask about the basic features of the product, and usually, when asking about Aruba products, customers don't pay too much attention to any specific feature as long as the product is solid and sure, and that you can change or modify it, as what you can get from Aruba Wireless."
"APs are very easy to configure to the network once they contact the controller."
"Its graphical user interface is designed to be user-friendly, making work more efficient."
"We like the centralized configuration and monitoring."
"Clearpass solution from Aruba."
"The initial setup was very easy and intuitive."
"One advantage is the built-in Zigbee-based IoT functionality. You don't need an additional dongle to enable that option."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The solution is stable."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The urgent areas of improvement would be customer support, better tuned default settings, and documentation."
"Additional detailed reporting for client traffic would be a great addition."
"Currently, the stability of the code is the basic underlying problem for us. They had an 8.6 release that came out two weeks ago, but we had to migrate twice because the code wasn't stable. We can't get things to work the same way. Version 8 was a big change for them. They made a change so that it is forced to be a managed hierarchical system. It means that you make changes at the top, and it pushes them downstream. There are a lot of problems with the 8.6 version code. I ran into four bugs in one week and was informed that we should just move onto the next one because all of those fixes have taken place. The feedback loop for fixes is not always really relayed back to you. I don't have a lot of strong things to say about version 8.6. When we had version 6, the controller was pretty much rock solid. We had no problems. We made a heavy investment to migrate a lot of stuff to take advantage of things like WPA3, Wi-Fi 6, and all that kind of stuff, and we haven't been able to turn those features on because we are not confident that they are going to work just yet. So, right now, we're still very much stumbling through the version 8.6 code and just trying to make sure that it is safe before we turn on some of those features. In terms of the marketplace, they are one of the top three leaders. In some respects, one of the things that they focus on is wireless. Therefore, there are some things that should be beyond reproach, as far as I'm concerned. In terms of the stability of the code, there are always going to be bugs, but the core stability of the code needs to be there. When it is not stable, that's a real problem for me because you lose a lot of confidence in the products."
"Configuration could be made easier with more bandwidth than they offer at the moment."
"Aruba Wireless can improve the assigning of access points. We have times that the nearest access point is not assigned but one far away. The integration between access points could improve."
"We need security features to recognize the traffic source and to apply Zero Trust security."
"Initial setup was complex."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is ranked 13th in Wireless LAN with 13 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "The portal for centralized management and virtual controller for APs are very valuable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points writes "Simple, easy to learn, and quick to deploy". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Huawei Wireless, whereas Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Mist AI and Cloud. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points 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.
