We performed a comparison between HPE 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.
"It's easy to use."
"We've found the scalability to be good."
"The most valuable features of this solution are it supports the newest virus technology, which helps with bandwidth, and is very stable."
"The performance is good."
"HPE Wireless is easy to use. Integration is not an issue. It is easy to integrate HPE Wireless with any operating system and other brands of switches."
"The support has been responsive and helpful."
"The reliability is good."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is flexibility."
"The solution is suitable for many types of environments, such as small businesses."
"Provides great coverage and performance."
"The best feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN apart from its seamless roaming feature where you roam beautifully on the network is its analytics tool that gives you so much insight into your deployment, so it has become more of a business intelligence type of tool as well. I also like that Ruckus Networks, in terms of WiFi security issues on the WiFi protocols, is also the first company to give you notices of security issues, and also the first to provide patches for those issues. Ruckus Wireless WAN is very proactive and much, much faster than Cisco, Aruba, and Meraki."
"The actual wireless access points themselves are very powerful."
"There are numerous features, but what I like about Ruckus is that they have a good coverage range due to their BeamFlex technique."
"Wireless six is the most valuable feature of this solution right now. It has supported the most recent laptop model."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN's best feature is its virtual controller."
"The strongest point for Ruckus has always been the radio hardware."
"The scalability is good, but it could improve."
"The HPE Wireless dashboard could be more user-friendly."
"It's very old-fashioned, which is why we have made the decision to replace it."
"I would say that the integration with other vendors in areas such as management or the visibility of other vendors in the management tools could be improved."
"The installation is easy. However, my implementation is complicated and you would need special training to complete it."
"The scalability and the support could be better."
"Technical support could be improved. They could respond a bit faster."
"In the next release of the solution, there should be better integration with other platforms."
"The initial setup is complex."
"I would like to have a better built-in reporting feature."
"The documentation they do have is very difficult to understand. There should be some scenarios, deployments, complications, or techniques to follow. They are inadequate in that regard, and the documentation needs to be greatly improved."
"I would like to see IoT device support available with WiFi six. IoT is used by all businesses. They are now using IoT devices. It is required."
"The controller could be made less complicated, so those who are less technically sound can maintain it."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
"The solution could be more stable."
"I would like to see the billing system improved by adding a billing system integration."
HPE Wireless WAN is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 12 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 15 reviews. HPE Wireless WAN is rated 7.6, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of HPE Wireless WAN writes "Provides network security, is user friendly, stable, and scalable, and has a lifetime warranty". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes "Has a seamless roaming feature, an analytics tool that gives deployment insights, and an uncomplicated licensing structure". HPE Wireless WAN is most compared with , whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Fortinet FortiWLM, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Aruba Networks Wireless WAN. See our HPE 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.
