Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

The product could benefit from features like Cisco's, such as improved zoning and analytics tools. A tool combining features from both Ruckus and Cisco would be ideal.

I have been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for about two to three years.

My experience with technical support has been good. Issues, such as license imports, were resolved within half an hour.

Cisco excels in radio technology and troubleshooting, though it is more expensive. Ruckus is more cost-effective and user-friendly for basic needs.

Cisco is easier to integrate with third-party solutions due to my extensive experience. However, integration with Ruckus is also feasible.

The solution has been reliable in our setup.

The platform's key features that impact network performance are multiple SSIDs, local switching, and mesh functionality. However, mesh is not recommended for high-traffic environments.

Its benefits include efficient zone deployment and access point distribution, simplifying network management.

I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten. 

We use the solution for data application and internet access. 

Ruckus Wireless WAN is simple to use. Its coverage is better than other tools. 

Ruckus Wireless WAN needs to improve its pricing. 

I have been using the product for 10-15 years. 

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is easy and can be completed in half an hour. One engineer is enough to handle the deployment. 

I rate the tool's pricing a seven out of ten. 

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN an eight out of ten. 

The solution is used to provide network access to users.

The solution can scale well.

The stability of the solution could improve in an upcoming release.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for approximately one year.

The solution is stable but could improve.

I rate the stability of Ruckus Wireless WAN a seven out of ten.

We have 30,000 users using this solution. The solution is being used extensively.

We did contact technical support.

I have not used a similar solution to Ruckus Wireless WAN.

The solution took a couple of hours to deploy.

Third-party assistance was required for the implementation of Ruckus Wireless WAN. We used two to three people for the deployment.

I have seen an ROI from using this solution.

There is an annual license needed to use this solution. The pricing model is based on how many access points are used.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a seven out of ten.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is used in hotels, schools, industrial warehouses, and camping areas for networking.

The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology.

Ruckus Wireless WAN we have a lot of component shortages in the world. This has impacted deliveries. We have large back orders of the solution.

I have used Ruckus Wireless WAN within the last 12 months.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is stable. We do not have a lot of failures. We have installed the units that have been on for years and nothing has happened.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is highly scalable. You can start with one and then expand up to 1,000. You only need to change the firmware of the access point and the management system.

The support from Ruckus Wireless WAN is wonderful. They have phone, chat, and online web support.

I have used many different kinds of similar solutions to Ruckus Wireless WAN. The one aspect that sets them apart from the other is the quality of the antennas. You can implement and design the networks in a very good fashion.

The initial setup is Ruckus Wireless WAN simple, it is logical.

The amount of people required to support Ruckus Wireless WAN depends on the requirements and what kind of business are you doing with it. We have large installations done by one person, but the ISP has to think about the first-line support. The configuration is not difficult it can be done by one person.

The price of Ruckus Wireless WAN is in the middle price range compared to competitors. You will find Cisco is the most expensive, the second is HPE and Aruba, and the third is Ruckus Wireless WAN. You then have all the follower solutions.

The price of the solution can vary substantially. If you have the simplest access point, such as the model R350, or if you have a very advanced installation based in crowded areas with model R850, the pricing is very different.

My advice to others is for them to try Ruckus Wireless WAN out, mostly as a cloud solution. That's a very good start. You can start with one or two access points and figure out if it's something that fits your needs.

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a ten out of ten.

We are a University and use this solution for our staff and students.

The actual wireless access points themselves are very powerful. We get very good coverage from just one access point. 

The throughput is very good and the centralized management is excellent. 

Also, the ease of deployment is very good.

There's nothing that anyone else is doing that the Ruckus doesn't do. 

If you compare to the market, I don't see room for improvement, to be honest. There's nothing feature-wise that I see with Ruckus that I think can be improved at the moment.

Of course, we'd always like it to be cheaper, but that's for every product.

I have been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for six years.

It's a stable solution.

It's scalable, just as we expected it to be.

We have 30,000 to 40,000 users.

Technical support is excellent. They are very responsive, very flexible, and willing to listen to the customer. 

If we do have issues, we get escalated to senior support very quickly.

It takes approximately three months to deploy.

We have a network team of approximately six people who not only support wireless, they support switches, firewalls, and load balancers. 

We have six people who support Ruckus as well as other areas. Three to four percent of the time, they are supporting issues with Ruckus.

It's expensive but you get more coverage.

Approximately five years ago, we compared Ruckus with five other products in the market.

Even though the wireless access points are expensive, they tend to give you three times more coverage. We ended up with far fewer access points to support.

Some of the solutions we evaluated were Cisco, Aruba, HPE, and Juniper.

I would definitely recommend this solution and tell others to use this product.

It's fantastic! I would rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a nine out of ten.

The solution is mainly used by carriers or for government usage. It's not really designed for normal usage.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the size of the outdoor access points. It's great and you can disguise them quite well.

The solution is quite simple to use.

The virtual controller is doing a fine job.

For outdoor usage, I prefer Ruckus. It's the best of all the solutions.

The only issue with the solution is that there is quite a lot of strong competition. It's very difficult to get a government or large public enterprise to buy Ruckus or Aruba over, say, Ubiquiti, which is the standard here. For example, we just lost a Ruckus deal against Ubiquiti.

At this stage, there are only minor improvements needed. Overall it's a very good product.

I've been using the solution for two to three years. However, I only use it occasionally. It's very rare that I actually use the product.

We've had absolutely zero technical issues. The solution is very stable. It's worked fine ever since the integration entered into ClearPass. Ever since then, the radius attributes work fine now.

We haven't had any issues with scalability. The solution has been fine in that sense.

I haven't been in regular contact with technical support. The last time I might have contacted them was about three years ago. We had an issue when we were trying to integrate Ruckus into ClearPass on Aruba into the ClearPass radio system. That was solved, however. The issue was that at the time Ruckus didn't accept all the attributes.

These days, it's my understanding that they are very good at assisting clients. We're satisfied with their level of service when we need to work with them.

Integration, if you're lucky, only takes a week or less.

We're implementors as well as resellers. We handle the implementation for our clients.

The pricing, when compared to Ubiquiti, isn't competitive enough. If you want to have a Government or Public sector client they will ask why they should pay 200 euros if they can get something for 40 euros.

We're Ruckus reseller and implementors.

This solution is very high-quality. I'd advise other organizations to look for the best solutions for their situation. However, I know how difficult this is to sell. It's difficult to sell quality when organizations just want to see the price tag. This is especially true in the government and public sector, that are always constrained by budgets.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's a very good product. It's a high-end product and it plays in the right league. We do have customers who are willing to spend money, but it's very difficult to find these jobs nowadays.

I use the product for internet connectivity.

The product is very user-friendly. The configurations are very simple, and the connections are very stable.

The interface has to be more automated.

I have been using the solution for 30 months.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability a nine out of ten.

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten.

It took us two days to deploy the solution.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten.

I am using the latest version of the solution. I would recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is used to provide Wi-Fi access.

Ruckus Wireless WAN's best feature is its virtual controller.

The controller could be made less complicated, so those who are less technically sound can maintain it.

I've been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for almost five years.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is very stable - once it's deployed, it takes care of itself.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is highly scalable.

Physically, Ruckus Wireless WAN is easy to set up, but when it comes to the configuration and the top, it's quite challenging. It also takes more time to deploy than Ubiquiti.

We used an in-house team.

You have to pay for the controller with Ruckus, whereas with Ubiquiti, it comes for free.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is a really good product, but the person deploying it may need a small amount of competence to do it successfully. I would rate it as eight out of ten.