Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

I have experience with Ruckus in a university campus networking environment. They utilized Ruckus for their campus networking needs.

It's quite impressive, and there are several aspects I like about it. Ruckus offers robust products with excellent speed. In our setup, we use the Ruckus controller model 144, which operates on a five-by-five basis. One of the standout features is the ease of installation and commissioning, making the whole process very straightforward.

When it comes to Ruckus, I must say they have their own solution, and their software meets the market standards. However, in comparison to Cambium, I find Cambium to be more robust in terms of performance. There isn't a significant difference between the two brands, Ruckus and Cambium. While there's always room for improvement, I don't believe any major changes are necessary in the market.

Proper product development, value, pricing, and division of these elements should be the focus. A well-integrated support system and a limited lifetime warranty, as opposed to fixed durations like five, three, four, or seven years, should also be in place. Clear communication between the product and its pricing is crucial.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for the last two years.

Stability is excellent for the products; they offer strong stability and I would rate it a nine out of ten.

It is scalable and I would rate it a seven out of ten.

Ruckus provides its support system, and customers should use it alongside their products. The support is satisfactory. 

Positive

It depends on the individual who is implementing it. If you have an experienced controller handler, it might take around eight hours to configure fifty to one hundred eighty units. You typically need at least one person for commissioning and configuring with a controller. For the standalone product, two people are sufficient to ensure power and connectivity, making it a three-person team for a smooth setup.

There are some constraints with the commercial leaders who are leading in India. It depends because, in some cases, Ruckus doesn't offer a price benefit to customers using their product. Customers have already purchased the product, and they're using it, but sometimes the pricing varies. It can be sold at one price at one time and then at a higher price at another time. This inconsistency can lead to confusion. There should be a price parity, and it should be consistent. This is something Ruckus lacks, especially in the Indian market. It's a global product, but in India, this control over pricing is not as strong.

Sometimes they sell it for Rs.20,000, and other times, they sell it for Rs.30,000. Then, suddenly, they ask for Rs.70,000. There should be a tiered pricing structure based on the quantity. We understand that if you buy more, the price should be lower, and if you buy less, it may be higher.

I would recommend users to better understand their market and customer sentiments. It's a competitive market with other companies like Acronis offering products with advanced technology, such as six and sixty-five-band capabilities. Ruckus should focus on product development by aligning with market needs. Currently, Ruckus seems to lack a full understanding of the market, and their product development reflects this. On a scale from one to ten, if I were to rate Ruckus, I would give it a six 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.

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.

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.

Many of my company's clients use Ruckus Wireless WAN.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from what my company's clients look at, which includes the solution's bandwidth, data speed, and coverage.

The pricing of Ruckus Wireless WAN is an area of concern. Ruckus Wireless WAN should slash its current price to match the prices offered by its competitors. Ruckus Wireless WAN should offer a competitive price to its potential users.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for four years. My company has a partnership with Ruckus.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine to nine and a half out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

My company handles 5,000 users of Ruckus Wireless WAN.

My company caters to the needs of enterprise-sized businesses who wish to use Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN is very easy. I rate the initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN an eight out of ten.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises, depending on the preferences of our company's customers. Right now, most of the people prefer the solution to be deployed on the cloud.

The solution's deployment takes around 15 minutes.

I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. Ruckus Wireless WAN price is quite high, but if you want a very good product, then it will be pricey.

Ruckus Wireless WAN has every feature that my company's clients need. Lately, Ruckus Wireless WAN has made itself available on the cloud while also offering Ruckus One to cover everything related to the expectations of the solution's users. My company will only have to look into the solution if any of our customers come up with any new requirements related to Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I would tell those who plan to use the solution that it is a good product that is easy to maintain while also offering reliability.

I rate the overall 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.

To be honest, we're not high-end users. We're schools, so as long as we can connect our iPads and laptops to the solution and join the network, then it works well for us. 

We use things like VLAN and all the multibeam features that are built in, but at the end of the day, the most important thing for us is to get a good signal and site-wide coverage. We probably don't use a great deal of the features that are offered.

We've just awarded a contract to a company to put the new Ruckus solution in, and that includes their cloud controller technology. We haven't had much experience with that yet. I suppose one of the things that I would've said is to move away from on-prem controllers to cloud-based stuff. Really, it's just about centralizing manageability across multiple sites, but like I said, that's me commenting on the old product that we've got. I know they've addressed that now with cloud controllers, but that would've been my main thing.

I have been using Ruckus for about seven years.

The solution is very stable. In all the time that we've used it, we've had no issues at all with it.

It is very much scalable. When we've had new areas of school added, we've been able to add additional access points and we've had no issues expanding it.

We haven't had experience with tech support because we pay a Ruckus partner to do the support for us. I believe they're an implementer because they do Ruckus installs for us as well.

The setup was very straightforward.

We awarded a contract to a local third-party company who did all the setup for us, and then they gave us some training on how to use it day-to-day.

ROI works a little bit differently in education, but we generally work off of a 
five-year replacement strategy for infrastructure, but with Ruckus, we've been able to stretch it to seven. To be honest, it would probably run for another two or three years if we wanted it to, so I'd say from that point of view, it has been a good ROI because we haven't had to replace it as often as we normally would.

We pay maybe a couple thousand pounds a year for support across our sites. Then, on average, an implementation at one of our high schools will be a one-time payment of about 25,000 to 30,000 pounds for a standard high school.

There is a change in the licensing model a little bit now, because we have to pay annually for the cloud licenses, so I think it'll be about 5,000 pounds a year moving forwards.

My advice would be to make sure that you properly survey your sites first, because with any Wi-Fi system, not just Ruckus, you've got to make sure that you take into account the fabric of the building and where you want your signal to reach, and the speed of the connection you need. I would say, make sure you do that first to give you the most stable implementation, but that's not unique to Ruckus, that's just general advice.

For a number of reasons, I would happily rate this solution as a nine out of ten. The support is good. The product, in terms of stability, reliability, and all of those things, has been very good.