We performed a comparison between Cisco Meraki Wireless and Ruckus Wireless based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Ruckus Wireless has an edge over Cisco Meraki Wireless in this comparison. It is easy to deploy and high performing. In addition, Ruckus Wireless has an impressive ROI and is less expensive than Cisco Meraki Wireless.
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most important feature is flexibility."
"It's a stable product."
"The solution is trustworthy. I find it easy and secure."
"The solution provides good coverage and identity management. Additionally, the user interface is straightforward."
"It is more robust for me to deploy networks. And because of the field we are in where offices open up and others close, it helps my turnaround time to deploy these networks for the customers."
"It is easy to set up. You can do everything on the GUI. You don't need to trace cables. You don't need to connect to the switch. Everything is there, right in front of you."
"The fact that Cisco Meraki is cloud based and is reasonably priced has been most valuable."
"It is cloud-based. It has a GUI rather than a command line, and it just works."
"There can be the same SSID for several devices."
"The product has some very awesome patents on their radios and their antennas and antenna patterns and how their signaling works. That's why nobody can touch them. If they go head to head with anybody."
"It's easy to install, and the management is flexible."
"The solution is very user-friendly."
"All IPs can be managed and monitored by the customer from a single console."
"The most valuable feature is that this solution is reliable."
"The APs themselves have been pretty solid. We haven't had too many of them go bad or anything like that. The wireless performance seems pretty good. The ability to provision the devices is pretty good, and the back end is also pretty good."
"Very reliable."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"The licensing model is a terrible idea."
"The only thing that always causes problems with Meraki is the license. It's a bit of a bugbear with Meraki, and it remains today. So it's an unusual concept compared to the other products in the marketplace, but then it does cause a bit of a nuisance from time to time."
"We have used technical support for some issues but not many times."
"The annual maintenance is something that needs to be changed."
"Our only concern at this stage is how it's licensed."
"The solution should be more secure."
"Meraki is still very much a small office type of solution. It is not a fit for large enterprise networks, as it doesn't have tunneling functionalities."
"The way Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN groups certain things, as far as the devices for either monitoring and or configuring them should be done better. They should be grouped a little bit differently because if I want to configure something, a different setting on an SSID, I have to go to their specific area where I would have thought it should be clumped as a dropdown menu in another area."
"I would like to see more location-based services on the Smart Cell Insight on access points."
"It would be ideal if the solution offered more features."
"It would be helpful to have a wizard when you are setting up a new access point or a wireless guest network."
"I would like to see this product made a little more economical because it's very expensive."
"The price could be improved."
"The solution should have more analytics capabilities."
"There is some strain with Ruckus because of various buyouts involving the company used for data centers and the cluster."
"It would be better if there were more visibility on the cloud. We have some lack of visibility because of wireless interference, and you have to do some troubleshooting for the packet capture. They have a built-in packet capture, and we can monitor the application. You can see all things over the cloud. They also provide an on-premise solution, so they need to improve the on-premise version and ensure an output with more visibility. Live monitoring in a live environment should be good. What is happening with wireless is that the wireless client is not connected due to interference, and there should be a shield zone on their wireless cloud. If they give us more features on both Ruckus Cloud or on-premises, that will be best. Nowadays, security is more important for everyone using wireless technology. If they implement a little bit of reduction and prevention features for some packets on the wireless cloud, some features like web filtering and some prevention for blocking will be good for the network."
More Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 62 reviews while Ruckus Wireless is ranked 4th in Wireless LAN with 53 reviews. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is rated 8.0, while Ruckus Wireless is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN writes "Highly reliable, effective site blocking, and beneficial reports". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless writes "Great performance, easy to set up and simple to configure". Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Mist AI and Cloud and Aruba Instant, whereas Ruckus Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Fortinet FortiWLM, Aruba Instant and ExtremeWireless. See our Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. Ruckus 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.
