We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless 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 solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The simplicity is great."
"Creating policies is simple."
"This solution is highly stable. We have only had one issue in seven years."
"This is a very stable solution that solves complex issues."
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"I like that Cisco Wireless is easy to implement. If you get stuck with any issues, they have ample documentation on the internet. It's easy to implement, and Cisco documentation is easily accessible."
"The integration is great."
"The CleanAir features and the fast transition."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless are the level of control and management. I am happy with it."
"The initial setup is not complicated."
"It is easier to set up, maintain, deploy, and everything was much better."
"This product is easy to use."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"If they could offer better coverage, we'd be much happier."
"The flexibility on the controllers isn't that great."
"The pricing could be reduced."
"The interface could be better."
"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."
"They are a pretty expensive option."
"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."
"For all products on the market, the availability of the products may not be ideal. We're waiting on a lot of products simply due to the fact that there's a material shortage. We've ordered products and have had to wait three or four months for anything to get delivered. This is not just Cisco. It's a problem on the market for all components which include semiconductors."
"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 Wireless is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 69 reviews while TP-Link Auranet EAP is ranked 18th in Wireless LAN with 3 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while TP-Link Auranet EAP is rated 8.0. 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 TP-Link Auranet EAP writes "Convenient cloud-based management, easy to set up, and quick to deploy". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and ExtremeCloud IQ, whereas TP-Link Auranet EAP is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Aruba Instant, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Aruba Wireless and NETGEAR Insight Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless 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.
