"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The customer always feels confident with the solution because of its reliability."
"Cisco Wireless is highly stable."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless are security and the ability to manage everything easily. Other solutions, such as Aruba are not as simple."
"The initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"The initial setup is straightforward."
"One of the main advantages of Cisco Wireless is its DNAT compatibility. When we have dynamic segmentation, or the DNAT enabled on the LAN, Cisco Access Point integrates with the DNAT architecture. Aruba Switches cannot integrate with the Cisco DNAT architecture."
"Its stability is most valuable."
"The integration is great."
"The installation process is very easy."
"The Artificial Intelligence on offer is very useful."
"The installation process is nice and easy."
"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."
"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."
"Older versions used to be hard to deploy. The latest OS, however, has made things a lot easier. While deployment is much better, it could always be even easier."
"Cisco's architecture is becoming complex."
"Cisco Wireless does not have a dashboard that would make it easier for people to manage the solution, such as Cisco Meraki where you are able to monitor the network through the dashboard and everything is visible making it easier."
"The licensing models need to be reviewed in some instances. Obviously Cisco's licensing models are quite challenging, and it can be costly."
"Room for improvement wise, the wireless coverage of Cisco's equipment could be better for the price position. That is, I think that the radius for the coverage could be better to make it worth the price that we pay for it."
"Older versions are complex to configure and implement."
"There's a delay in equipment that comes to Columbia, to our country, and that lasts almost six months."
"The support on offer to other vendors switching - like Aruba or Ruckus - could be improved."
"The solution could offer more integration with other products."
"We would prefer it if the solution could be less expensive."
More Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 76 reviews while Juniper WLC Series is ranked 14th in Wireless LAN with 3 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Juniper WLC Series is rated 9.4. 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 Juniper WLC Series writes "Stable with good AI capabilities and helpful technical support". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Huawei Wireless and NETGEAR Insight Access Points, whereas Juniper WLC Series is most compared with Mist AI and Cloud, Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and ExtremeCloud IQ. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Juniper WLC Series 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.
