We performed a comparison between Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and TP-Link Auranet EAP 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 most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The simplicity is great."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The most important feature is flexibility."
"It's a stable product."
"What I liked about these is that they worked. I didn't touch them or do anything with them. They were up and running when I came here. Once they are set up and running, you don't have to worry about them."
"Its flexibility, ease of management via the portal, and the variety of access points are the most valuable features."
"If you're trying to identify one of the switches or pinpoint a computer or pinpoint something, you could find it just like that and change the IP address. It's easiest to do it that way."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"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."
"The solution is easy to use."
"It is easier to set up, maintain, deploy, and everything was much better."
"The initial setup is not complicated."
"This product is easy to use."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"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."
"There should be better Spanish-language technical support."
"Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve by having more granularity in terms of the data displayed. However, I understand that with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, you need to have a compromise point to what are the functions that you're going to provide to the users versus ease of use. More granularity in terms of the data and the things that you can do to the devices would be helpful. For example, when we wanted to make a change, restriction, or segregation within Palo Alto, we can go to the level of detail that we want. The amount of detail provided is amazing, it is very granular. However, it comes with much more difficulty, it requires a technical understanding of the environment compared to Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN."
"They're great. If there's anything that they need to change, it is just simplifying the site to which you go to make changes on the admin side."
"There is a processing limitation when you have multiple SSIDs, above three or four."
"Cisco offers pretty expensive devices."
"The throughput of the switches for wireless could be improved."
"We would like the solution to work on the pricing of the solution. It would be ideal if it could bring the overall costs down."
"There could be more functionality."
"The technical support could be improved."
"It would be nice if the dashboard was more customizable."
"TP-Link Auranet EAP is not very efficient, they need to improve it."
More Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 62 reviews while TP-Link Auranet EAP is ranked 19th in Wireless LAN with 3 reviews. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is rated 8.0, while TP-Link Auranet EAP is rated 8.0. 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 TP-Link Auranet EAP writes "Convenient cloud-based management, easy to set up, and quick to deploy". Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Mist AI and Cloud and Aruba Instant On Access Points, whereas TP-Link Auranet EAP is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Aruba Instant, Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Cisco Wireless. See our Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN vs. TP-Link Auranet EAP 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.
