We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless WAN and Ruckus Wireless WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless WAN are its security functionality. We have a lab environment and we have to provide different authentications to the users which are easy to manage. Additionally, there is a lot of useful automation embedded into the system."
"I give the scalability a nine out of ten."
"It's a small feature, but Cisco allows me to see access points with blinking lights. This shows me which access point is which."
"Cisco Wireless WAN is stable and scalable, and the support received is good."
"This is the most stable product in the market."
"This stability is one of the major reasons to stick with this product."
"The most valuable features are user and handling capacity, indoor and outdoor access points and antennas, and the inbuilt intrusion prevention system."
"Cisco Wireless WAN's best feature is the integration with other Cisco products."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the size of the outdoor access points. It's great and you can disguise them quite well."
"One of the best features of Ruckus Wireless WAN that customers are interested in is the adaptive antenna called BeamFlex. Ruckus Wireless WAN also has the best management platform, and even if there are thousands of users of the solution, it's very easy to manage on Ruckus Wireless WAN. It can also support third-party equipment. It's an all-in-one solution and it has IoT and secure access capabilities. Upgrading the network to Ruckus Wireless WAN is also easy."
"The deployment access in the local system is about 200 access points. External access points is more. The number is huge. There about 1,000 users in total."
"The ratio of highest quality to value is the most valuable."
"The performance of this solution is amazing in terms of radiofrequency technology."
"The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology."
"One of its notable advantages lies in the superior performance of its antennas and radios."
"The solution is easy to use and offers good management for wireless."
"There are some limitations with scaling the on-premises version - if you want to scale, you need to change the hardware and purchase a new wireless controller at an additional cost."
"The integration support technology should be improved."
"The interface is a little bit difficult to understand at times. It would be good if Cisco were to make it user friendly so that everyone can easily configure it without the need to do certifications and courses to learn how to use all of the devices."
"Cisco Wireless WAN is expensive."
"The initial setup and deployment should be easier."
"Cisco Firewall cannot recognize some applications and that makes dealing with policies difficult. Even when we whitelist, it does not work well."
"The coverage area on some of the low-end access points isn't the best. The high-end ones are fine, but we've had bad experiences on the other ones."
"I hope Cisco can improve the capacity to service a high density of users in a small area, as currently we have difficulties with this."
"The GUI interface of Ruckus Wireless WAN could be more usable, especially the drag-and-drop feature."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN we have a lot of component shortages in the world. This has impacted deliveries. We have large back orders of the solution."
"The solution could use a better user interface."
"This product needs a point-to-point, bridge solution."
"I believe there is room for improvement in the price structure."
"I have been working with WiFi for more than 17 years. I am not able to convince customers because of the pricing of the solution. Otherwise, we could have sold lots of this tool to the customers."
"Pricing is an area for improvement. The devices are relatively expensive."
"It would be nice to some analytical features built into this solution."
Cisco Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 61 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews. Cisco Wireless WAN is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless WAN writes "It's a reliable, user-friendly solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". Cisco Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Fortinet FortiExtender and Ubiquiti Wireless, whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and HPE Wireless WAN. See our Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.