Coming October 25: PeerSpot Awards will be announced! Learn more
Buyer's Guide
Wireless WAN
August 2022
Get our free report covering Cisco, Cambium Networks, Ruckus, and other competitors of Fortinet FortiExtender. Updated: August 2022.
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Fortinet FortiExtender alternatives and competitors

Owner at a consultancy with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Reliable, easy to implement and has helpful support
Pros and Cons
  • "It’s very stable and reliable."
  • "The initial setup is complex."

What is our primary use case?

We have vertical markets and there's almost no real use case since it's all industry. Aruba is not really designed to be used in private households. We do have a few private customers. However, they have a very high demand on security. If they have a high demand on the performance, we definitely reach with Aruba however, the majority of our customers are industry related.

How has it helped my organization?

For one customer, what happened was they used to be on a different network on NPLS. That was very expensive and software-defined wide-area networking is a huge cost saving and much easier to be managed.

What is most valuable?

The solution can save money and can be easily implemented, depending on the environment.

It’s very stable and reliable.

What needs improvement?

There aren’t really any large improvements necessary. There are smaller improvements we request, however, they are communicated directly. We are not an end-customer. We use our direct channels.

The initial setup is complex.

For how long have I used the solution?

I’ve been using Aruba since 2005.

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

The solution is very, very stable. It’s not buggy. It’s not glitchy. It doesn’t crash or freeze. It’s very reliable. The performance is great.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is scalable in its limits. It's scalable. The main purpose is for bigger organizations - for public, schools, universities, or bigger industries. You could scale it down also to household usage or to high-demand private usage. You can do a lot with it.

We have implemented it twice on a university campus and there we have maybe 2,000 to 3000 users. We have industry users. I would say it could be anything between 3,000 and 10,000 users.

If it is a midsize company, they don't have planning for scaling expenditure. With the bigger companies, they plan to expand, however, then you always bump into Cisco. It’s the biggest competitor and the most popular one.

How are customer service and support?

Customer service from HP is pretty good.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We didn’t really use a different solution. There wasn't much in the market in 2005. When we started, we started with wireless into the early and late nineties. By that time, you had very small island solutions. There were three coming market and a few other products that were controller-based, and almost nothing was controller based.

If you look at the competitors, they're almost all the same, they're just the different flavors and whatever you are used to it and how comfortable you feel with the product. We do WAN products with Aruba. We do WAN products with Fortinet as well. We do software-defined networking, the same as Aruba offers; however, there's not much difference between them.

We’ve also used Ruckus. We have a few customers in the carrier business, and Ruckus is primarily used in the carrier business. It's placed in the same league as Aruba.

How was the initial setup?

In terms of the initial setup, it’s complex. It's not straightforward. The only straightforward item is the very instant access points; however, as soon as we’re working in a complex environment, then it takes a lot of knowledge. It takes good knowledge and could take a few days to implement.

I’d rate it a two out of five on a scale from one to five, where one is extremely difficult, and five is extremely easy.

We are a very small company. We normally use the IT department of our customers, and they are trained. They keep maintaining their own system. For smaller customers, we do the maintenance, and we also do the monitoring. We have partner companies. We swap our 24/7 services. If you offer 24-hour service, it takes about six to eight technicians to take care of the 24/7 services.

What was our ROI?

We don't monitor if the company or the customer has any ROI. It's quite difficult to answer what the ROI is, and what the return of investment is. Most customers don't even look at ROI on wireless.

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

The license is a one-time subscription. It's a one-time purchase, however, the update is a subscription.

It is unfortunately very expensive. The subscription, the software maintenance subscription, and even the one-off pricing are very high.

The license costs reflect the features. The more features you require, the more you have to pay.

What other advice do I have?

We use different versions of Aruba.

We are Aruba partners. As a partner, of course, I will try to encourage other people to look at Aruba and implement Aruba. Some of the features are not unique however they are very highly developed, and the solution is highly sophisticated. It's the best of its breed. As a partner with different vendors, however, you have to look at the requirements, and you have to make a decision on the requirements.

I’d rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: My company has a business relationship with this vendor other than being a customer: partner/implementer
Flag as inappropriate
Sachin Vinay - PeerSpot reviewer
Network Administrator at a educational organization with 1,001-5,000 employees
Real User
Top 5
Simple to set up and good outdoor accessibility but does not penetrate rooms well indoors
Pros and Cons
  • "Ubiquiti outdoor access points in particular, are really stable, and if there are no obstructions, Ubiquiti works well."
  • "t does not have traffic shaping or traffic policies in its wireless requirements."

What is our primary use case?

In the school area, we have deployed Ubiquiti Wireless. Each floor has four Ubiquiti Wireless solutions. We have indoor and outdoor solutions and it is used for long-distance communication. Indoors, the students rely on Ubiquiti Wireless for day-to-day academic activities, like classes, attending seminars, everything. We have deployed Ubiquiti Wireless in their applied building, and it has a controller also, a virtual machine controller.

How has it helped my organization?

Before the deployment of Ubiquiti, we were running local authentication mechanisms like WPA2 personal with the local wireless routers. We were not able to implement WPA2 enterprise authentication methods. After the implementation of Ubiquiti Wireless, we were able to implement this WPA2 model authentication with a username and password. It becomes more secure and students and staff can easily rely on it to meet their daily needs.

What is most valuable?

It has a radius authentication mechanism. In our enterprise authentication, our authentication type is radius 8.2.1X authentication. Ubiquiti is readily supporting that. We have a separate SSID with 8.2.1X authentication, and with Ubiquiti Wireless, we can spread it across all our buildings with the SSID network.

The initial setup is simple. 

It is stable. Ubiquiti outdoor access points in particular, are really stable, and if there are no obstructions, Ubiquiti works well.

What needs improvement?

Ubiquiti requires more improvement in wireless penetration. It has significantly less penetration in indoor devices. When it comes to indoor devices, Ubiquiti Wireless does not have penetration power, so when we deploy it in closed rooms, it fails to connect. This is one drawback that has to improve.

When indoor access points failed to penetrate into rooms, we had to deploy single access points in each room, which seemed to be really costly. Still, when compared to Fortinet, it has an outdoor access point model also. The outdoor access point is relatively stable in comparison.

The solution needs to offer more scalability.

It does not have traffic shaping or traffic policies in its wireless requirements. We have to completely depend on an additional firewall for traffic shaping and policies. 

For how long have I used the solution?

We've been using the solution for six years. 

What do I think about the stability of the solution?

It is a stable solution. It's reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

It is not very scalable. 

We have six networking people using the solution. 

We are not planning to increase Ubiquiti as we don't have good feedback regarding Ubiquiti Wireless. 

How are customer service and support?

Technical support is good.

How would you rate customer service and support?

Positive

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

We have a mix of Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti Wireless, Jenkins Wireless, et cetera. We are also using Fortinet APS for Access Points.

We had a lot of issues with Fortinet regarding connectivity, stability, and everything. We tried to move to Ubiquiti, which was actually somewhat stable. We tried it out in our one building and when compared to Fortinet, it had a slightly higher advantage, however, still, we had issues with the penetration power.

We are planning to migrate more to Ruckus and Aruba.

How was the initial setup?

The solution is very easy to set up. It is not overly complex. 

It's fast to deploy and only takes two to three hours. 

We have six people that handle deployment and maintenance. 

What about the implementation team?

We handled the deployment in-house. 

What's my experience with pricing, setup cost, and licensing?

I cannot recall the exact pricing. However, my understanding is that the pricing is very good.

What other advice do I have?

We are a customer and end-user.

We're using the latest version and have updated it. 

Ubiquiti Wireless is an access point wireless solution. However, I would suggest it more for outdoor use. For outdoor devices, if you deploy Ubiquiti, then you'll get the proper signal and coverage. If you are in a building, or any other premises that have obstructions or hard walls, then I would suggest not using Ubiquiti Wireless. It has less penetrating power. It will not come inside rooms. 

I'd rate the solution six out of ten.

Which deployment model are you using for this solution?

On-premises
Disclosure: I am a real user, and this review is based on my own experience and opinions.
Flag as inappropriate
Buyer's Guide
Wireless WAN
August 2022
Get our free report covering Cisco, Cambium Networks, Ruckus, and other competitors of Fortinet FortiExtender. Updated: August 2022.
632,779 professionals have used our research since 2012.