Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

It provides wireless networking solutions, including Wi-Fi access points and controllers.

The ratio of highest quality to value is the most valuable.

The primary drawback is the absence of support for our initial client in Lithuania, especially in the field. We currently reach out to technical support in various countries. Specifically, we connect with support, and I believe the upcoming contact point will likely be in Ukraine. There is a significant issue with wireless functionality in Apple devices, particularly during video calls. The challenge arises when users attempt to utilize both Microsoft and Apple products over a single Wi-Fi connection.

I have been working with it for five years.

It offers good stability capabilities.

It provides good scalability abilities.

There is a need for a local support team.

I used Fortinet and certain Cisco products. These were primarily geared towards business use, complying with standards. The emphasis was on creating products for larger-scale applications rather than for small-scale use.

The initial setup is straightforward.

The deployment time varies based on our customers' requirements. If it aligns with standard configurations, it can be completed in approximately ten minutes. However, for more complex setups or larger enterprises, the deployment might extend to ten hours.

It possesses a favorable balance between quality and price. While it may not be the most affordable option, investing in the higher-priced, top-tier product line with models like 85 and 50 proves to deliver excellent performance.

We strongly endorse and recommend Ruckus products to our customers, showcasing their effectiveness and reliability. Our extensive experience includes deploying Ruckus equipment in large-scale events, such as conferences with around three thousand attendees, where the Wi-Fi performance has proven to be excellent. Overall, I would rate it nine out of ten.

One service provider offered a managed Wi-Fi solution using Ruckus Wireless. They used Ruckus to offer managed Wi-Fi solutions. The clients install Ruckus for their clients, like hotels and offices.

Ruckus is primarily an enterprise solution. It might be suitable for remote office scenarios, but it is not typically used for home offices. Its price point and capabilities make it less practical for home use.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is highly regarded for managing network performance. They have simplified the configuration and installation processes, making it straightforward. It works out of the box; you just configure it, and there's minimal need for minor adjustments. However, if you're managing a large venue with thousands of people, such as 2,000 attendees, you might need to do some additional tweaking to optimize the network.

It is 99% reliable.

Sometimes, you can't do everything you need on the GUI. Some configurations can only be done through the CLI. It would be nice if everything could be managed through the GUI. Another consideration is the price. Clients are very cautious with their budgets. A few are willing to pay for the best quality without compromising the WAN. While Ruckus Wireless offers excellent quality, the price point can be high. Special registration discounts are available, but the product can be expensive.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN as a system integrator for over ten years.

I have not had any issues with Ruckus Wireless WAN's ability as long as the provisioning is done correctly. For high-volume areas with many users, such as a board room or an auditorium with around five hundred people, it's essential to use an appropriate access point model. For instance, an R350 wouldn't be suitable for such high-density environments. It remains reliable as long as the access point deployed matches the expected number of users. 

The only issue would arise if an entry-level access point is placed in a high-density area, causing latency issues and network slowdown.

There's a newer model now. You can start with ten access points with five licenses. So it's flexible. You pay as you grow. The model is quite nice because they were bundling the licenses when they started out. Now, it's one license per access point to scale slowly. The SmartZone can support up to a thousand access points, which is more than adequate for most needs. 

Scalability is a significant advantage because you don't have to spend more money changing the controller. We've not had any issues with clients because it's easy to explain: if you have ten access points, you buy ten licenses. It's straightforward. If you need to add another five, add five more licenses as you grow. 

Support is very efficient. I have no issues. The only condition is that you have to have a paid support license.

Positive

Setting up Ruckus Wireless WAN involves pulling cables and mounting the access points according to the required number. However, configuring the system is straightforward, and it takes about five minutes to set up a basic Wi-Fi network. Integrating with systems like Active Directory or other servers might take longer.

Mounting the access points requires technicians capable of climbing ladders and handling cables. One trained engineer is sufficient for the actual device configuration. 

The price could be reduced a bit. The SKUs or part numbers come with a one-year support option and a five-year support option. Depending on the budget, the client can choose the one-year option. With one year of full support, clients receive immediate assistance if anything breaks. They can renew this support every year.

IBM has a wide range of equipment. They don't only deal with Wi-Fi but also offer switches and point-to-point, point-to-multipoint solutions. However, Cisco stops at switches and offers only controllers and Wi-Fi access points.

I have handled four RMAs where something was faulty, which added about twenty bucks. I have had clients who insisted that there was no need to change the equipment I installed five years ago because it is still working. This demonstrates the reliability of Ruckus Wireless WAN.

Ruckus offers a free controller version, which sets it apart. The price point is low. For example, if you compare a Wi-Fi 6 access point to Aruba's equivalent, the price would be lower.

The most important lesson is conducting a proper WAN site survey and correctly designing the network. When these steps are done correctly, the chances of having issues are minimal. If any issues do arise, they are usually minor teething problems.

Overall, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

We use Ruckus Wireless WAN to control our guest users. We brought our traffic on a network. We also integrate Cisco Integrated Network Access Controller with our Ruckus Wireless controller. We use this integration for two purposes: security tagging and to bring users into a group according to the health of their system. If it’s a guest, they should not have access to our critical infrastructure assets. If a user is an admin, they will be placed on the WAN that is relevant to the management WAN of the devices.

Scalability is a valuable feature. For example, if you have a person from the HR department on the tenth floor and another person on the first floor, they should have access to the same VM or network. The Ruckus Wireless controller allows you to control this regardless of where the APs are physically located. You can control it from a central point, which makes it easier to manage.

Huawei is a competitor of Ruckus Wireless WAN solutions. They offer IoT-enabled solutions, and their access points are very robust for outdoor use and can manage up to 500 users. However, their products’ bandwidth and frequency range are not as good as some locally available products, and the cost is also higher.

The GUI interface of Ruckus Wireless WAN could be more usable, especially the drag-and-drop feature. When switching a WAN, users should not have to go into the configuration and manually change the WAN. Instead, there should be a drag-and-drop feature like most other vendors offer. This would make the process easier to understand and complete.

Additionally, Ruckus Wireless WAN should consider adding a special provision for APs. This would be helpful for marketing campaigns, but it is not mandatory.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for two years.

The product is stable.

Almost 1,500 endpoints, including IoT devices, and one administrator are working with this solution.

Ruckus Wireless WAN has local support, and the local staff and office are very active. They respond to calls promptly, and Ruckus Support is also very good, with a quick response time for emails and tickets.

Cisco is more focused on its branches. Huawei has more customers in telecom operating sectors, such as optical fiber and other devices. Ruckus is the only brand we can test on, with a focus on the app and controls.

You can quickly get help online from the Ruckus Wireless WAN community. You can even watch videos on YouTube on how to install and upgrade your servers. There was a complete series of installation videos, and I could install it myself. It was very easy and convenient.

If you're planning to install Ruckus Wireless WAN and need to research something you can't find anywhere else, the Ruckus community is robust. Simply Google a Ruckus-related question, and you'll likely have an answer within two to three minutes. Other devices, even Cisco’s unified devices, are still relatively new. While Cisco has a strong community, if you're looking for a solution to a problem without contacting support, you may not be able to find much help online.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

It is widely used in Multi-Dwelling Units.

One of its notable advantages lies in the superior performance of its antennas and radios. The platform appears to be more straightforward to configure compared to Aruba, offering greater user-friendliness, especially in terms of the graphical user interface. This makes it particularly accessible for non-technical individuals who simply want administrators to oversee and manage the Ruckus controller engineering aspects.

I believe there is room for improvement in the price structure. In terms of features, I believe there is a need for further development, particularly in enterprise security. The control aspect in Ruckus seems less detailed compared to Aruba. It also needs improvement in NAC integration.

I have been working with it for thirteen years.

I am content with the stability of the on-premise setup and haven't encountered any issues with it. However, the upgrade process becomes challenging whenever it is initiated. The private cloud tends to be a bit sluggish during updates, contributing to longer update times.

Scaling for a large organization with Ruckus can be somewhat complex. The challenge lies in the fact that scaling is limited up to a certain level, and beyond that, upgrading to the next hardware tier becomes necessary. While virtual machines offer more flexibility, dealing with scaling on a physical controller can be a somewhat troublesome process. I would rate it eight out of ten.

The technical support is generally responsive, particularly for initial troubleshooting handled by the first-line support team. However, when it comes to issues requiring escalation to level two, the troubleshooting and response time tend to be prolonged.

For the majority of my customers in the hospitality sector, I would continue to choose Ruckus. However, for those engaged in enterprise operations, I can confidently recommend both Ruckus and Aruba. Aruba, especially, makes more sense in an enterprise context due to its comprehensive features and control capabilities.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We have experience using both solutions—both the cloud deployment and the on-premises controller. Ruckus's private cloud is exceptionally well-executed, particularly for basic needs in MDUs and hospitality settings. However, for enterprise applications, it may necessitate additional equipment, especially for data plans. Yet, once integrated with data plans, it performs effectively.

The cost is quite high, and over the past year, there has been a substantial increase, nearly reaching around seventy percent. I would rate it one out of ten.

I would recommend it mostly for enterprises and medium to large-scale organizations. However, for small businesses, I wouldn't recommend it primarily due to the relatively high price point. Smaller companies may not utilize all the available features, meaning they would end up paying for functionalities that go unused. It's a highly effective product, and while there is room for improvement in certain aspects, particularly for my primary customer base in hospitality, it performs exceptionally well. I would give it a rating of seven out of ten.

We primarily use Ruckus solutions to provide wireless access for our colleagues at branch locations.

We have just moved to their Ruckus Jones platform, which provides a cloud-based management solution. Having all the management tools in a cloud-based solution has been valuable, eliminating the need to deploy and manage an on-premises controller. The AI, which helps diagnose and solve problems, is also beneficial.

There is a need for more flexibility in granular access control. Currently, role-based access is cumbersome and lacks flexibility.

I've been using Ruckus since about two thousand ten.

We had one issue with one venue at one site, but other than that, it has been generally pretty stable.

Scalability seems decent. Adding access points for a site is easy, so scaling is not an issue.

The customer service is generally pretty good, however, there can be delays with open cases, which sometimes take a while to resolve.

Positive

For wireless solutions, I've used Meraki among others.

The initial setup of the Ruckus Jones cloud-based controller and management system was fairly intuitive and straightforward.

I was managing the deployment on my own initially, but I have another team member who assists with network administration. So, it involves one to two people.

The pricing is reasonable for us as partners since we receive discounts. However, I believe for non-partners, it might not be considered cheap, though it isn't the most expensive either.

Good, careful planning is important. It can be helpful to test new firmware on a nonproduction site before rolling it out to other locations. 

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten.

In my company, we sell the tool to individual houses or small customers.

Ruckus Unleashed App has areas with certain shortcomings where improvements are required.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for six years.

It is a very scalable solution. For larger implementations, you can use the product with the Ruckus Unleashed App. You only have to change the controller, which must be changed from a small environment to a large environment. If you have to change the controller, it is not cheap. The tool is pretty complicated in terms of exactly if you want to expand and you need to change the controllers. You have to change the main equipment, the controller, and it is not cheap. You have to program everything from the start.

I don't use the solution's technical support. The customer service from Ruckus is good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

The product's installation phase is a fast process and can be done in a couple of hours, especially for small to medium installations.

I have seen a good return on investment from the use of the product. I have seen the product's ROI for end users but not personally since I am a reseller.

The product is available at a very good price, but it is not cheap compared to tools like Unifi. I believe it is a very good product for the price that it is offered to users.

In my office, the product is used on a daily basis for our daily operations and network management. I also use it in my house.

In general, the product is nice and comes at a good price.

In terms of the benefits, I can say that the product is very reliable.

There are no challenges with the product's integration capabilities.

The maintenance of the product is easy. I can say that it doesn't require much maintenance.

The product's security features have had the biggest impact on the network performance of food by the solution.

I highly recommend Ruckus to my customers.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use Ruckus Wireless as a wireless solution here and for switching as well. They are also great for outdoor connectivity.

It's great for the hospitality industry. We mainly deployed it here in the hospitality industry as they are very concerned about their customers in hotels. They stay there for leisure, so they don't want any complaints about their WiFi solutions. We mainly deployed them in five-star hotels and in sports facilities. 

We deploy them in our universities where there are a large number of students with multiple devices (laptops, mobile phones, smartwatches). They need a strong, robust solution for WiFi, so we use Ruckus Wireless. 

We rate them very high. We found it a very robust solution.  

I like the smart roaming feature. It is very valuable for us. Nowadays, people use video conferencing on phones and for Zoom meetings, so, while walking on campus or in a hotel, people experience no disconnection while using Ruckus Wireless. It literally helps us give a better experience to the end user.

The initial setup isn't complex. 

It's stable.

The solution can scale. 

The solution offers good security.

The pricing is fair. It's competitive. 

We found the technical support to be helpful.

In my region, I want to increase its distribution channel. We have one sole distributor here in our region. To have multiple distributors here would be very helpful to improve the supply chain. We need better access to stock.

I've been working with the solution for around seven years. 

It is a very stable product. We work on Cisco, Huawei, Aruba, and different wireless solutions, however, as a technical person, I find that Ruckus is one of the most stable products I have experienced.

It has great scalability options. They have controllers that support 3000 APs, so it is more than enough. 

The number of users can easily be ten to 20,000 in a larger-scale network. It is not an issue having a number of users. It is a very scalable solution.

We have used support and find them very helpful. We get service from nine to five, and even after five, if we need assistance, we can get help.

We also work with Cisco, Huawei, Aruba, and different wireless solutions.

We use Cisco here mainly in the market. Cisco was the leading product in switching and wireless before, or rather, Cisco and Aruba. Aruba is HP, and Aruba is a very strong product. However, when we started doing Ruckus, we grew more satisfied selling Ruckus as the more stable product. With a better product, we win the customer's trust and their businesses.

Initially, it's not so complex to implement. For a technical guy, it's normal. It's like every other solution; it's not very complex.

Depending on the setup, for a normal deployment, which would be two to five devices for a smaller-sized office, we can do it in one day.

We have five to ten team members trained on this, and multiple other products (including Sophos, FortiGate, and Cisco) and they can perform deployment and maintenance tasks.

How much staff you need for each deployment depends on the magnitude of the project. Normally, one engineer and one technician are enough for a deployment, which contains WiFi configuration in placement. However, in a case where cabling and infrastructure are needed, we need a different team. It depends on how much cabling is required. Depending on the requirements, we plan the project accordingly.

We can handle the setup in-house. We don't need any consultants to help us.

The licensing has different versions. Licenses are perpetual, you have to only buy one. However, they have support costs that are charged yearly for three years or five years. You have to buy the support for the license.

If you compare it to a similar kind of solution, the pricing is very competitive.

As a service provider, we have deployed many Ruckus solutions here in our country.

We mainly use its newer versions, which are WiFi six supported R550 and R650. These are the fastest-selling products. We normally sell R550 and R650 to our customers.

I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company since the product was already in place before I started working in my current organization.

To be honest, all I have done with the tool is to check access points and ensure they are running. The tool is also used to issue guest WiFi passwords.

The license model offered by the product is an area of concern where improvements are required.

To be honest, as far as I am aware, and from my research, the issue is pretty much only with the tool's cost. Some of the configurations in the tool are a bit awkward. With the access points, when I try to apply the configurations now, it doesn't take the firmware.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for a year and seven months. I use the solution in my company as an end user.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten. It takes a minute to find out why it is not responding when going to an access point.

The scalability of Ruckus Wireless WAN benefits your operations since it is pretty good. The issue I have with the tool is associated with the fact that we have a limited number of licenses. In my company, we are considering scaling up a little bit, but the cost of licensing may prohibit it. Also, the controller we have at the moment has reached the end-of-life phase. My company may have to look at changing all the access points and going to a different provider or upgrading the controller, after which it may not be possible to use some of the current access points, and it may cause us to change those for some working-based ones.

Around 50 people use the tool. I really can't say a number with any level of accuracy.

The actual wireless or configurations going into the solution need to be looked upon. Going into the solution to check it is something that is done very frequently.

I tend to use a third-party provider for technical support for the solution. Based on other people's opinions, the technical support is excellent, and I rate it a ten out of ten. I have no personal experience with the tool's support team.

Positive

I have some experience with Cisco, but not as a real user. I switched from Cisco to Ruckus after I switched over to my current organization from another company.

I was not involved in the product's initial setup phase. It was installed prior to my joining.

I have not investigated pricing because it was present in the company when I started. My company is using the rules and plans from the product's document so that we can try to make some decisions and find out some details.

I have not had an opportunity to investigate how Ruckus Wireless WAN can handle network density and high-traffic scenarios.

I have not looked at AI features in Ruckus Wireless WAN.

From my limited experience, I would recommend Ruckus Wireless WAN to others, but I won't be able to say why I would do that.

I rate the tool a seven or eight out of ten.