We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless 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."With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"I'm very satisfied with Cisco's technical support."
"Setting up Cisco Wireless is pretty straightforward. It takes about an hour or two, and we can handle it in-house. To deploy one project, it takes two to three for a single controller."
"I like that it's a standard wireless solution that can be rolled out throughout the campus. I also like that it is easy to manage. It is a good end-to-end solution."
"The most important thing for me is that all the access points are in one group and use one access code. So, when you move from one area to another, you don't disconnect and reconnect again. The device is also very easy to install and control."
"The solution is scalable."
"It is tough, has a nice speed, and is quite reliable."
"Cisco Wireless is scalable."
"Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support."
"The solution is easy to set up."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its simplicity."
"It provides high-speed network connections."
"It has all of the features that we need."
"At the moment, I only have experience with the on-premise deployment of Huawei Wireless, but the cloud solution looks good on paper. It looks perfect. I can say that Huawei's cybersecurity is very good, stable, and works for long periods. My company has four devices running uptime for more than four years without stopping. I also like that the support for Huawei Wireless is swift, and support does precisely what you require, at least from the point of view of the technical engineer who communicated with Huawei support, as I'm more of a technical sales guy. Good technical support is vital to my company, partners, and customers. My company had this ongoing project with an ISP provider in Bulgaria that bought some routers. Still, the existing equipment was a completely different brand, so this provider wanted to migrate to Huawei Wireless and wanted help while migrating the existing infrastructure to Huawei, so the technical engineer assigned to raise the ticket with Huawei for checking and setting parameters correctly provided feedback about Huawei technical support being good quality-wise and TAT-wise. The technical engineer was also Cisco-certified and Juniper-certified and was not experienced with Huawei equipment. Still, he did mention that the Huawei Wireless router interface was straightforward, and even a person who's new to it would find it easy to configure. Huawei Wireless is user-friendly, which is another pro of the solution. It's easy to manage, and even the program language setting can be done with fewer commands than Juniper and Cisco equipment. Some of the features in Juniper need an external program, and the same features can be found in Huawei Wireless built-in, which I find remarkable."
"The best feature of Huawei Wireless is the quick and fast setup."
"The most valuable features of Huawei Wireless are WiFi coverage and ease of use."
"I think it's a good technology. I like that it transparently connects with LDAP. The technology has a lot of capacity for WiFi six. It provides notifications, and there are many ways to connect with fiber. There is an electrical tool, and you can put an SFP transceiver. There are also many ways to implement antennas."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"The solution is expensive."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"The price could be better."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"Cisco Wireless could improve if they had some kind of social media integration. There is some limitation with social media integration and wireless interaction. They need to add some additional components to their wireless devices to complete the solution or requirements."
"And from an administration point of view, it is a very tedious job to check on each and every control. We have around 30 or 40 controls in our network."
"Installation is complex."
"The installation is very tiring and painful, the process could be easier."
"The media stream and Mojo settings are not sufficiently supported."
"It was expensive. Considering the challenges faced in third-world countries like Pakistan or India, cheaper solutions are preferred."
"The coverage area of Cisco Wireless could improve. Additionally, the reports when a problem arises could be better, such as how it is done in Aruba Wireless solutions. In the Aruba wireless solutions, there are reports that are provided regarding uploads, downloads, and other internet activity that are useful. If this feature was added to Cisco that would be a benefit."
"The reporting tool in Cisco Wireless could improve. If I am trying to receive information about a client or user, it's cumbersome to retrieve the information on the controller system. If I'm trying to find out where a client's been, it's cumbersome. You need another tool for Historical logs, but it should be all in one."
"They should include more security features in the solution."
"The manageability could be improved."
"Support could be a bit faster."
"The demo program is an area for improvement in Huawei Wireless as it's hard to use. As a partner, you can use the solution for free, for thirty days, for example. On paper, everything looks fine, but you have to get permission and explain why you want to download the software, even if it's just for demo purposes. I don't get why I have to do this as a partner and still give an explanation that this would be for a demo setup. Downloading the solution isn't a click-and-install process that should go smoothly and efficiently. You have to get a lot of approvals and explain a lot, and in the end, you find out that you received the approval for one piece of software. It looks like you need additional software to use the software. My company asked for approval and received the approval three days later, but you need to install another software to use some of the features. In the past, most features were separate. Because Huawei wants a single pane of glass where all features should work with the Huawei equipment, Huawei decided to combine everything into the iMaster NCE Campus, which incorporates every other cloud solution. However, you still have to ask for approval for every piece of software, and without clear information on the features, the type of software, and the software files required, it's not so good from my point of view."
"Huawei Wireless is not scalable. We have had a problem with the solution because it cannot integrate with other servers as the other competitors can."
"The solution could be easier to use."
"Huawei Wireless can improve the signal, sometimes it becomes weak."
"The speed could be a bit better."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 51 reviews while Huawei Wireless is ranked 6th in Wireless LAN with 15 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Huawei Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Robust with a good level of performance and very helpful technical support". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Huawei Wireless writes "Stable and has a user-friendly interface. Its technical support team is responsive, quick, and precisely does what you require". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless and Omada Access Points, whereas Huawei Wireless is most compared with D-Link Wireless, Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless and Dell Ruckus. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Huawei 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.
All are good selections, and this question is difficult to answer without knowing your throughput requirements, as each vendor has multiple models within there series.
Personally I recommend looking at Arista Networks’ cognitive Wifi, where controllers are a thing of the past.
Ruckus virtual smart zone will be your best bet allowing up to 300k connected devices and 30k access points. furthermore, Ruckus has time and again proven best in speed, throughput in high density environments by independent studies. I have over a decade of working with this product and none of the other competitors can beat the layer 1 connectivity of Ruckus WiFi
Hi,
Every one of the mentioned solutions is good but you need to check the needs which are security since the firms you are working with need protection and tracking of data. For this reason, I recommend:
- if you have FortiGate installed then go for Fortinet Wireless since they can be integrated with the Fortigate without buying a controller and they work perfectly together and you will get the advantage of applying rules to the client himself whether mobile or computer, easily managed & monitored, more visibility over your network and incident notifications.
If the above doesn't apply then you can go with the best one that fits your budget and security needs which for me doesn't fall on the mentioned solution but to go with ARUBA Instant Access Wireless Solution and the reasons are as such:
- Cisco is too much expensive and you got to pay smart support with some complexity in configuration and you need to buy a controller
- Ruckus is good but when you want to have the security you need to buy a controller with licenses and it won't give you the security needed since it is just a wireless solution
- Huawei is not a stable company since it had many ups and downs and they can reach with you to have all the solutions nearly free so that you install their brand.
Whereas Aruba you don't need a controller in the Instant access points and you will get the minimum security with radius integration and what is important a lifetime warranty on the access points.
In addition, if the number of access points increased and you want more detailed management and more advanced configurations, you can buy a controller either on-premises or on-cloud with Aruba.
The above information is based on my experience with all the solutions and their POC.
If you need any more details and consultancy, kindly feel free to contact me.
Regards.
Hi Imad,
Thanks for your input. Do you have any POC data for Cisco and Aruba?
Thanks in advance
Boa tarde
As soluções cada solução que você indicou tem pormenores que podem impactar tanto no funcionamento quanto em caso de disaster recovery.
Fortinet: Possui bons access points, aliado às funcionalidades de segurança do próprio UTM, porém será mais um serviço para o appliance gerenciar, e dependendo do que está rodando nele, corre-se o risco de degradar a performance da funcionalidade principal "segurança", por que tambem está gerenciando uma rede wireless, além do fato se houver alguma pane no appliance Fortinet, tanto os itens de segurança quanto a rede wireless irão ficar indisponível. Dê a Cézar o que é de Cézar, deixe a fortinet focada em segurança, que é o que ela faz de melhor.
Ruckus: Excelentes Access points, confiáveis e com alta performance, possui no mínimo 4 opções de gerência, sendo, controlerless Unleashed, appliance virtual, appliance hardware e cloud, ambas as opções não trará prejuizo à performance da rede wireless, porque não há tunelamento de dados para elas, além de possuir várias funções de segurança inerentes à rede wireless. licenças são perpétuas.
Cisco: Excelente access points, porém solução muito cara para aquisição e renovação.
Huawei: Pelo que conheço, tem bons access points, e controladoras virtuais e appliance físico, mas conheço poucas redes com esta solução.
É lógico que uma tem um recurso extra a mais do que a outra, mas considero mera perfumaria, pois o básico para uma rede wireless segura todas atendem.
Eu já atendi a mais de 40 universidades federais no Brasil, todas com Ruckus, e não há reclamação da solução.
Como recomendação pessoal, vá de Ruckus.
Hi,
It is all dependent on the size of the controllers in question. Though I would suggest getting a cloud base technology so you are limited by any controller and have much better redundancy. Take a look at Arista Cognitive Wireless