We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Omada 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.
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"It has very flexible features."
"The coverage, concurrent user life, and visualization are the most valuable features of these solutions."
"HA: Apps failover without reboot."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba Wireless is the controller. It is easy to use."
"Aruba allowed for the detailed control and management of an entire WiFi network from a single screen backed by a support team with local SEs who work with business partners to ensure the product's success."
"The wireless controller and access points are valuable features."
"One advantage is the built-in Zigbee-based IoT functionality. You don't need an additional dongle to enable that option."
"Clearpass solution from Aruba."
"The pricing is reasonable."
"The solution has been dependable and has kept up with modern technology."
"Its sturdiness and cost-effectiveness are the most valuable features."
"When this solution is set up, it is solid. It offers fast deployment."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its price."
"Omada Access Points are very good in terms of wired technologies and wired connectivity."
"The performance and availability of Omada Access Points have met our business needs, particularly in improving network control and facilitating direct access for developers to branch services."
"This product is easy to use."
"The solution is expensive."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"Aruba is missing some features that are available in other solutions, such as the email notifications. It's a bit complex to configure the notification part. Mainly I'm talking about the rogue WiFi detection. This email notification is crucial for us, but it isn't possible to configure with the built-in software. You need something else, like an external system log collector or another Aruba software. These notifications are essential in hospitality for PCI compliance. My colleagues in famous luxury hotel chains need that report."
"The solution's documentation could be better organized in an information portal."
"The enterprise controller. I'm planning on getting more information on that."
"Better integration with equipment from other vendors would ease the deployment process in some cases."
"The solution could be improved on the security side."
"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."
"What needs improvement in Aruba Wireless is its access point, in particular, it should have more flexibility. Aruba Wireless has Campus AP, Instant AP, and Unified AP, but it would be better if the product has a generic access point that you can manage over the cloud, on-premise, etc. Another area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is scalability. In terms of what additional features I'd like to see in the product, I'm unsure if it's already on the roadmap, but if possible, it would be good to have an SD-WAN functionality on the AP in Aruba Wireless."
"The Help option within the GUI needs to be improved."
"The price of the solution is an area requiring improvement since I want the solution to be made available at a cheaper price than its current market price."
"Aruba has better scaling capabilities."
"It's better for smaller organizations. This would not work for enterprises. It is not very scalable."
"There is room for wider improvements and additional features to enhance managing capabilities."
"Upgrading the hardware capabilities to newer versions like Wi-Fi 6 or Wi-Fi 7 would be a helpful improvement."
"We have some issues with stability. It is not so fast. That is the main problem."
"It is less affordable for smaller businesses."
"The solution takes a long time to switch to another connection, which should be improved."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Omada Access Points is ranked 16th in Wireless LAN with 13 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Omada Access Points is rated 7.6. 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 Omada Access Points writes "Reliable solution, fast deployment and easy to scale". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Ubiquiti Wireless, whereas Omada Access Points is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Aruba Instant, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Cisco Wireless. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Omada 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.
