Ubiquiti Wireless Reviews

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.

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.

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.

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. 

We've been using the solution for six years. 

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

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. 

Technical support is good.

Positive

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.

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. 

We handled the deployment in-house. 

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

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.

The solution has a user-friendly interface. It has many essential features, including encryption. 

The solution's stability and setup process could be better. Also, there could be a LAN controller feature similar to Ruckus in Ubiquiti's next release.

We have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable. Although, we encounter stability issues in crowded areas.

The solution is suitable for small and medium businesses. We have 20-25 users in our organization.

I refer to support documentation in the case of queries for the solution. It is good and helpful.

The solution's initial setup could be more straightforward. It takes half an hour to complete tests and finish the process after installation.

The solution's price is reasonable for a basic device.

Compared with the solution, Ruckus has a lot of software and tools for wireless functionality. It also has a LAN controller feature which is not available in Ubiquiti. I prefer using Ruckus or Cisco products while working for large companies.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I primarily use the solution within small networks.

It's really helped with network management. 

The visibility of the devices and the switches is great. If troubleshooting issues come up, it's easy to deal with things.

We like that there's one pane of glass that we can look at everything through.

The ease of deployment is great.

It is stable. 

The solution can scale.

It offers fair pricing. 

The accessibility to technical support could be better. We'd like to actually speak to a person without going through chat. We'd like real-time assistance when we are trying to resolve issues. 

With our configurations, the UX could be better. With Cisco, for example, there are certain things you can do that you just can't do on Ubiquiti.

We'd like to be able to use COmmand Line instead of the UI. 

I've been using the solution for five years. 

I'd rate the solution eight or nine out of ten in terms of stability. It is stable and reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. 

This is a scalable solution. I'd rate its ability to scale eight or nine out of ten. 

Technical support needs to be better. They need to be more responsive and easier to reach, especially when we need to speak with someone for troubleshooting. 

The initial setup is very simple. It is not overly complex. 

I have witnessed an ROI. 

The pricing is pretty good. It is reasonable. 

We may use the latest version of the solution. It depends on the client's deployment. 

I'd advise people to do their research and have a good understanding of the product.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten. 

Some of our customers have a user base as high as 250.

Ubiquiti devices are centrally managed, and you can log into the access points via SSH. If the GUI isn't working for some reason, you can intervene via SSH.

It's difficult to get Ubiquiti hardware in Germany, which poses a problem because I urgently need some routers and other devices that we cannot acquire right now. 

Ubiquiti is also slow to adopt new technologies. We are transitioning to Wi-Fi 6, and there aren't many products. They have mostly Wi-Fi 5 products, but there are only two Wi-Fi 6 products. It's okay for places we have already equipped, but it's a bit hard for new places.

Their gateway is good for people who lack an IT background and need to rely on a GUI. For example, they have a special gateway for that product group within the wireless devices. However, I find it to be restrictive. It's a dedicated gateway from the wireless to the internet. While the approach is clever, it would be helpful if it were more like their Edge devices.

The product group known as Edge has two GUIs: one for the people without a technical background and another for advanced users. You can also use the command line interface. These devices don't have that approach. You only have the GUI. While the GUI has broad functionality, it still lacks the flexibility IT professionals need.

I have been using Ubiquiti for six or seven years.

We haven't had any problems. You even can handle a large number of access point users. You get good quality for the price. 

Scalability is one reason we use Ubiquiti. It's easy to scale up because of the centralized administration approach. 

Ubiquiti has excellent internet forums, but there's hardly any support. You can email them, and they will respond quickly but you might not get the solution you need. However, it's relatively easy to get quick information about an issue because the open-source community supports Ubiquiti very well.

The problem with their call centers is that they sometimes even don't know what they're talking about, and they are costly. You go to the internet if you have an issue, and you'll usually get your answer. Cisco has service plans that you don't get with Ubiquiti, but you pay a fair price for the hardware. 

I've worked with Cisco. Cisco products always have issues you need to patch, and it's an old brand. Cisco can do everything, but you'll need to spend lots of money educating your staff. Anyone who can use Linux can handle Ubiquiti. While Cisco solutions are powerful, you need a Cisco-certified expert, and these guys are very expensive. You need to hire them or train your staff. Either way, it costs you a lot of money For me, Ubiquiti is the product of choice because of the flexibility it provides us.

Setting up Ubiquity Wireless is simple, and when something doesn't work, you can intervene via SSH. 

I rate Ubiquiti eight out of 10 for affordability. The hardware prices are the easy part. However, the costs of maintaining and operating the infrastructure can be expensive. 

By comparison, Netgear isn't as flexible as Ubiquiti. I can automate Ubiquiti on a large infrastructure because Ubiquiti devices run on Linux. I can write a Linux script that is executed on the devices, and quickly automate it. This is also possible with Cisco, but not Netgear. Netgear devices are common, but I always call them hobby devices. If you're just an ambitious hobby user, these devices are fine, but they are not for professionals.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless seven out of 10. These devices are suitable for small and medium-sized enterprises. If you use the Edge line of products, you need to understand protocols or networks, architectures, etc. They're perfect because you can almost do everything with Cisco products for a much better price with a significantly lower learning curve.

The most valuable aspect of Ubiquiti is the ease of setup. It's easy to set up, secure, and use. It works on an adoption basis. I can pull the system up, design a network, and pull 20 different Ubiquiti units into it.

It depends on whether you're setting up separate VLANs or whatever, but let's assume a normal scenario with a standard network. You pull all the systems into it and adopt them all, then Ubiquiti incorporates the system into whatever structure you want.

Ubiquiti could develop a more elaborate firewall solution. Their firewall solutions at the moment are entry-level. Maybe they don't want to bring those products in because many people prefer putting a third-party firewall into a solution like that. We usually do. 

We use Untangle, but the big question at the end of the day is which market they want to target.  They're offering an entry-level firewall product, but if they improved, they could aspire to the higher end and maybe take on the likes of FortiGate and Untangle. Sophos has a complete end-to-end solution with a high-end firewall and AP.

Ubiquiti should approach things like Sophos and make a more comprehensive product. It would be so nice to integrate an end-to-end solution that gives you control over your network. I could set everything up and see it all on the same protocol, roll-out, setup, etc.

They could maybe also make their setup software a little more user-friendly. I don't know if they can improve it much, but they could make it more accessible specifically to first-time users. When you're just starting out, you might not understand you need to download the software and have certain configurations in your web browser to link to it. They could do away with that, but I'm not sure how much of a security impact it's going to have.

I've used Ubiquiti for five or six years.

Ubiquiti is extremely stable. Aside from maybe user issues and that kind of thing, I've never had any of my Ubiquiti installations go down due to product failure. I've never had an AP or switch fail on me.

Ubiquiti is highly scalable.  I've seen Ubiquiti rolled out in massive setups and huge buildings. I know companies that run large warehouses, manufacturing, etc., and their whole backend infrastructure is Ubiquiti. They are pleased with it.

They function as well as Cisco core switching. Sometimes it just depends on the scenario, but from a scalability point of view, all Ubiquiti products work together. 

I can mix old Ubiquiti access points, LR units, etc., with new Ubiquiti products. More recently, they've done things like Nano and Wifi 6. You can't mix the Wifi setups, but that's a technology issue, not a product issue. That allows a lot of scalability. Most of them don't reach layer 3 level on their standard switches, but most are layer 2. You have edge switching and layer 2. It's rudimentary networking.

We work with local Ubiquiti support, which has been excellent. I would rate them eight out of 10. 

It's a fairly easy setup even if you don't know Ubiquiti and it's your first time. You follow the instructions. Compared to something like NewCitrix, Ubiquiti is a million times easier to set up. So I think Ubiquity would be for a normal IT guy and whatever, Ubiquiti would be an easy setup where, specifically guys like that, that have to set up NewCitrix, you have to learn how NewCitrix works and then run with it like that. But from initial setup, I find Ubiquiti extremely easy to set up.

Ubiquiti is on-prem, but it has a cloud-based deployment and management system. You connect it to the system and do your setup as soon as you've done your setup, and you basically finalize your system, then you can take that cloud link away. Your system runs without it.

All the vendors' prices have gone up, so Ubiquiti has gotten more expensive. In terms of price versus performance, they're still well priced, but they are more expensive than entry-level products like Tenda and TP-Link. 

At the same time, it's still affordable enough for a home user. We do a lot of homes sometimes. So, a home user that has the money, that wants the reliability and whatever, I would put UniFi in their house before I would put in Tenda or a lower end product. In that respect, I definitely think Ubiquiti is very well priced, so I would give them easily a four out of five on pricing.

From a price perspective, compared to Cisco, where you could put one AP down for Cisco, and get a lot of users, a lot of security and everything like that. For the same price, you can put down three Ubiquiti's and those three Ubiquiti's can do what the one Cisco unit could do.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless eight out of 10. I would definitely recommend Ubiquiti to others unless it's a scenario where you have a massive deployment or the client has an existing Netgear, HPE, or Aruba setup. 

Their products are durable and easy to use. Ubiquiti fits into that mid-market segment. Ubiquiti slots in below Aruba, Cisco, and all those heavy-duty systems, but it's still a robust product. In most cases, I'd suggest Ubiquiti over and above your bigger names like Cisco, Netgear, etc. It's definitely a cut above things like TP-Link and Tenda. It has its own market share right there in the middle

When you're managing more units, it helps to have handover and the capacity to switch between multiple inputs and outputs. Ubiquiti handles that well. Obviously, when you have hectic layer 3 networks and huge roll-outs, HPE and all of those other big names are more appropriate products. However, Ubquiti is the most reliable product in 80 percent of general use cases.

We're primarily using the solution for WiFi access. It provides us with an access point for the network. The devices are controlled by a controller, and we can apply security policies via our network. This can help control end-users. 

The solution is very simple. The facility of the integration is great.

It allows us to offer policy control.

The solution works very well.

It's easy to set up.

Sometimes we have some micro breaks we do not know what causes them. Maybe it is based on the monitoring of the network, or maybe it is the architecture or the integration of the equipment. The stability could be improved. 

I've used the solution for a while. I'm not sure how long we've used it. It has likely been five years. 

The solution can be more stable. We have had some issues with micro-breaks which have affected connectivity. I'd rate the stability six out of ten.

It is a really scalable solution. 

We have around 100 end-users. Maybe 20 are using the network, with the rest on wireless.

We've never dealt with technical support in the past.

We did have an experience with Linksys. However, it was not a good solution. 

The initial setup is simple to set up. I did not take part in the process. However, I haven't heard of any issues. 

It takes about one hour to deploy and connect a node. It might take a month to set up a full network.

We have ten staff, including managers, that can assist with the deployment and maintenance. 

The operational team handles the setup. It's handled in-house. 

We are a small enterprise. We do not look at ROI. That said, most are working five years later.

We do not have a license. We just pay for the solution. 

We are using the latest version as we always upgrade the firmware. 

I'd recommend the solution.

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for wireless connectivity. It's for mobile management. It can manage my switches and everything via mobile. 

It is very user-friendly.

The solution is very straightforward in comparison to other solutions. It's quite quick to deploy.

The solution is stable.

It is scalable. 

It offers very good pricing. 

We'd like the solution to be more stable and have fewer firmware upgrades. More features should be available straight out of the box. It could be less complex and offer more simple principles.

I've been using the solution for a year and a half.

It's very stable. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good. 

My understanding is the solution can scale. 

We have four or five people using the solution. It's just for home usage. 

I've never needed the help of technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We do not use any other solutions at this time.

It is quite straightforward to set up the solution. It is not overly complex. The deployment was fast and took less than a day.

The setup can be done in-house. There was no need to have any integrators or consultants involved. 

The pricing is quite low and very affordable. I'm not sure of the exact cost.

I did not attempt to evaluate other options before beginning to use the solution. 

We have a mixed environment. The APIs are obviously on-prem, and all the management is in the cloud.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

If you want a low-cost option, if you don't have the budget, I'd advise you go for Ubiquiti.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

We have approximately 60 branches and they all use access points, and they are controlled by one software controller in our headquarters. We use it only for normal Wi-Fi and guests.

The most valuable feature of Ubiquiti Wireless is the ease of configuration.

We have an issue with Ubiquiti Wireless every three to five months for one of the access points.

I have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for approximately seven years.

The stability of Ubiquiti Wireless could improve. We have found there is too much fluctuation in the Wi-Fi and after two to three years you can notice the performance degradation.

Ubiquiti Wireless is scalable. However, the number of access points should be determined. 

When using Aruba ClearPass we discovered the controller is not talking to Aruba ClearPass, but every access point can communicate with the Aruba ClearPass. That means every access point is working alone but the controller only pushes the configuration to all access points. It is not really an access point controller.

We have approximately 1,200 people using the solution.

Ubiquiti Wireless does not have support directly, such as Cisco and Aruba do, you have to rely on community support. However, they do sell support for enterprise companies.

I have used Aruba previously.

The initial setup of Ubiquiti Wireless is easy and the implementation can take up to several hours.

The price of Ubiquiti Wireless is affordable, we pay approximately $100 and $150 per access point.

I would recommend this solution is best suited for small and medium businesses. Small businesses I would classify as 200 to 400 people using the solution. Aruba is a better solution.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless a five out of ten.