Ubiquiti WLAN Reviews

My main use case for Ubiquiti WLAN is just access to the internet.

I find the features of Ubiquiti WLAN most valuable. I appreciate that it has a controller instead of just a single access point, similar to how Ruckus operates.

I utilize Ubiquiti WLAN unified management system, and it helps streamline network management by making consistent configuration of all my access points and switches. I also have cameras integrated, so I have everything managed through the system.

I have seen benefits from utilizing Ubiquiti WLAN as it's a stable solution. I also see scalability as a positive factor for Ubiquiti WLAN.

I don't see any room for improvement in Ubiquiti WLAN.

I would appreciate additional features, but I think it's offered at a reasonable price. Perhaps AI functionality could be added for enhanced capabilities.

I've been using Ubiquiti WLAN for approximately four or five years.

I haven't faced any challenges or difficulties installing Ubiquiti WLAN. It was easy for me.

It does require some maintenance from my side, including troubleshooting and fixing occasionally.

I am also involved in the maintenance process sometimes.

Currently, there are only two to four users working with it in our organization.

I am not planning to expand the number of users in the future. I'm going to reduce the number.

I would assess the scalability feature of Ubiquiti WLAN in accommodating my organization's growth or changing network demands as pretty scalable, warranting a nine out of ten rating.

I haven't communicated with the support of Ubiquiti WLAN as I haven't needed their assistance.

Positive

Before Ubiquiti WLAN, I worked with similar solutions, including Cisco.

I switched to Ubiquiti WLAN because it was easier to set up and understand how it was working.

It took a few hours to set up the controller during installation.

The complete installation process took two to three hours.

I completed the installation by myself without any external assistance.

They can't compete with the pricing compared to other vendors.

My experience with overall licensing costs, setup costs, and pricing of the product is that it's reasonable.

I work with other solutions including Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco, and similar vendors.

I am still using Ruckus solutions at a school where they use my services, and I usually help them with that. I have expertise with Ruckus products.

I use features such as WPA3 encryption or guest network isolation, though I haven't fully explored them yet. They are automatically enabled.

We don't use mesh networking features because it's limited in speed. The whole idea is that it's sharing the speed among the same network.

I've tried to convince other users to use Ubiquiti WLAN, but they haven't decided yet. It might all change in the future.

I would rate the product in general as a nine out of ten.

Public Cloud

Other

My use case for Ubiquiti WLAN includes segmentation for a client in oil and gas, where I segment their physical security, CCTV, IoTs, computers, and voice into separate VLANs for better management and operation.

I find that the most valuable aspect of Ubiquiti WLAN is its ease of segmentation and management, allowing me to tag interfaces without needing to spin up an interface.My feedback on the Unifi management system is that it has made managing my devices and ecosystem easy, allowing me to manage remotely and physically while maintaining a new layer of security for device policies.

My expert view on Ubiquiti improvement is that capacity has been a concern, especially since I needed to change some of my devices to a 10 gig network due to limitations.

I have been working with Ubiquiti WLAN for about four or five years now, and it has actually grown to be better than it was initially.

I would rate the stability of the product as a nine out of ten.

For scalability, I would rate it a seven; it has the ability to expand but has some limits.

I am still using Cisco products, particularly my Firepower and my Cisco Firewall, but I changed all my switches to something different.Currently, I went to something cheaper and I am using Unifi switches.I just focus on the Cisco Firewall as my only firewall, and it is also my gateway; I am not working with Cisco ACI or FabricPath for LAN switching.

The initial setup process for Ubiquiti WLAN is very simple.

In my opinion, the main competitors for Ubiquiti WLAN are Cisco Meraki, which is expensive, and HP.

I find that the most valuable aspect of Ubiquiti WLAN is its ease of segmentation and management, allowing me to tag interfaces without needing to spin up an interface.My feedback on the Unifi management system is that it has made managing my devices and ecosystem easy, allowing me to manage remotely and physically while maintaining a new layer of security for device policies.I would say I am fine with the security features from Ubiquiti WLAN; I have not had any issues managing devices or applying different layers of security.Mesh networking is one of the best for me; especially with my isolated Wi-Fi network, it is managed easily using Ubiquiti.I mostly work with on-prem deployment, but I have a transparent outlay into my network on the cloud for remote insight without using cloud storage on my devices.My deployment for cloud is essentially a virtual private cloud for storage, and I am considering an integration to store videos on Ubiquiti devices, moving them from on-prem to the cloud.I am totally satisfied with the functionality of Ubiquiti WLAN for my clients; it does exactly what I need.For pricing, I rate Ubiquiti WLAN as cheap when compared to others.Ubiquiti WLAN is the only one that provides unlimited capabilities for customization, which I greatly appreciate compared to Cisco options.I have not requested technical support from Ubiquiti before because I usually solve issues on my own if they arise.I rate this product a nine out of ten overall.

Hybrid Cloud

Other

My primary use case for Ubiquiti WLAN is to provide wireless connectivity for corporate use and create a guest WiFi with a captive portal for guests. I also use it for site-to-site connections using Ubiquiti WiMAX radios.

The Cloud Key Controller is a valuable feature because it allows me to access the wireless system from the cloud and locally within the same network, enhancing network management. It enables me to scan the wireless system to identify radio frequencies that can impact the network, allowing for remediation. The routine updates are a valuable feature, as they are regularly provided and enhance security and functionality.

There is room for improvement in providing the flexibility to change the default management VLAN from VLAN one to another for enhanced security. Most organizations prefer not to use VLAN one for security reasons, and Ubiquiti could improve in this aspect.

I have about five years of experience working with Ubiquiti.

The stability of Ubiquiti WiFi depends on the setup. It has generally been stable, but sometimes updates can cause devices to go offline, requiring a reset and re-adoption. Proper connections and cabling are essential for maintaining stability.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate the scalability of Ubiquiti as seven. It is suitable for medium-scale enterprises, although it might struggle in very complex environments with many users.

I seldom contact the technical support team as there is comprehensive documentation and FAQs available that help me resolve most issues independently. When I do reach out, I usually get a response with steps or documentation to address my concerns.

Neutral

Before Ubiquiti WLAN, I used solutions from Cisco and Fortinet. The switch was mainly due to Ubiquiti being more cost-effective, not requiring a license for maintenance, and offering competitive performance compared to more expensive solutions.

The initial setup of Ubiquiti WLAN is straightforward and not complex if the network is well understood. It is flexible and easy to set up compared to other solutions.

I usually handle the implementation myself, as I am familiar with the environment. Local partners supply the equipment, and while they offer implementation services, I prefer to set up the solution myself.

Ubiquiti is affordable, as it does not require recurring licensing fees. It only requires purchasing the appliance itself, making it a cost-effective solution for wireless deployment.

I have recommended Ubiquiti WLAN to several companies and IT professionals. Although some organizations may opt for Cisco if budget allows, Ubiquiti is an excellent choice for those looking to minimize costs. 

I rate Ubiquiti WLAN seven out of ten for a good solution.

On-premises

I'm using Ubiquiti WLAN for many installations. We recently deployed 640 wireless links for just one contract. On average, we deal with about 25-30 virtually every week. In addition, we also supply many access points.

The main advantage of Ubiquiti WLAN is the network management. The whole concept has one complete range of products from end to end, with very basic and effective management systems. That's a key benefit in my mind. But the main thing is that it's so competitive—far more competitive than the other leading American brands.

I think the main area for improvement with Ubiquiti WLAN is that they need to be far more specific in explaining the advantages of one product versus another. They have many access points - over 30. We often get questions about the right product for specific circumstances, and it's difficult to answer them clearly.

I have been working with the product for four to five years. 

I rate the tool's stability an eight out of ten. 

I rate the solution's scalability a six out of ten. 

Regarding technical support, I can tell you that up until this year, it was very poor. However, they've improved it considerably now. They have a very effective support team in place, and we use it regularly. The response time is very good now.

Positive

As an importer and distributor, we don't spend any time installing Ubiquiti WLAN products ourselves. We only resell the products to installers and don't do any installations directly. From my knowledge, though, the installation process is extremely straightforward. We get very few technical questions from our customers who do the installations.

Based on our experience as distributors, I can say that virtually every installation we deal with now is centered around the UniFi Gateway. Although we don't handle installations directly, more companies rely on Ubiquiti gateways instead of standard options like FortiGate switches as routers. With the new UDM Pro Max product, Ubiquiti WLAN has covered the whole spectrum from home installations to the largest possible enterprise installations.

I would rate the solution's pricing a nine out of ten. It is high. 

I would recommend Ubiquiti WLAN to other users and organizations. We have options to supply HP, Cisco, and other brands, but our first option is always to recommend Ubiquiti WLAN. We mainly choose Ubiquiti WLAN over other options like Juniper because of its cost-effectiveness.

Overall, I would rate Ubiquiti WLAN at eight out of ten. I don't give it a nine because, at this moment, there's only one new Wi-Fi 7 product in their lineup. They should have pushed harder on Wi-Fi 7 development at this stage.

I use Ubiquiti Wireless LAN for medium-level customers. It is employed for small installations or networks rather than high-density scenarios such as venues. For more complex systems, I prefer to use Ruckus.

Ubiquiti Wireless LAN is reliable and offers a good quality product. It provides one interface to manage all installations, allowing me to monitor all customers through the same web interface. 

The web interface in the controller allows for quick configuration of devices with just one click, which is a significant advantage.

A potential improvement could be the addition of artificial intelligence features, similar to what Ruckus offers. This could provide a detailed view of connections and possible disconnections, offering valuable insights for improving Wi-Fi connections.

I have been working with Ubiquiti VLAN for approximately two or three years.

Ubiquiti Wireless LAN offers medium-level stability. It performs well as an access point but is not designed for high-density environments. However, I am satisfied with its performance in its intended use.

Scalability is a strong point for Ubiquiti Wireless LAN. It allows for easy addition of products to the network environment. I preconfigure the product in my lab, making it ready for operation upon delivery.

Support from Ubiquiti is hard to obtain. However, there is a good forum where a lot of information can be found. The problem with Ubiquiti is the lack of a serious reselling chain, as they sell directly to the customer.

Neutral

I have adopted new solutions, such as Sunfor, KVM, and Proxmox, due to VMware's pricing changes and the resulting issues with customers. I still use VMware for some clients due to their existing commitments.

The initial setup for Ubiquiti Wireless LAN can be time-consuming if done directly. However, I mitigate this by pre-configuring devices in my lab and utilizing a cloud controller to manage them, making the actual deployment straightforward.

Ubiquiti Wireless LAN is reasonably priced for its level; it is considered medium-priced, suitable for the quality it offers.

Competitors for Ubiquiti include Cambium Networks, TP-Link, and EnGenius. I have not personally tested TP-Link, so additional details on direct comparisons are unavailable.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless LAN a seven out of ten. 

For certain customers, it is the best solution, offering medium-level capabilities at a reasonable price. However, for those seeking enterprise solutions, Ruckus is unmatched when budget allows. 

Private Cloud

Other

We typically use the product in process systems where wireless connectivity is essential, almost like IoT applications. Instead of cables, we prefer wireless solutions, and that's where Ubiquiti WLAN comes into play.

The platform is user-friendly compared to other products I've used, such as MikroTik.

The product could be improved with more extensive documentation or resources for network engineers.

I have been working with Ubiquiti WLAN for two and a half years.

I rarely experience problems caused by the equipment itself, and any issues I've faced are generally related to external factors like power outages.

I rate the product stability as a nine.

Approximately 50 of my customers in the agricultural sector are currently using Ubiquiti WLAN. 

I rate the scalability an eight. 

The documentation provided for Ubiquiti WLAN is sufficient. While network engineers might benefit from additional resources, the information available has been enough for my needs.

While MikroTik is highly capable, it is also more complex to configure. Ubiquiti stands out in terms of ease of use.

The initial setup process was relatively straightforward, with only minor challenges typically caused by user errors, such as password mismatches. There were no significant issues with the equipment itself.

Each deployment is unique, but setting up a point-to-point connection to control a pump based on a dam's water level was a smooth experience. In my applications, particularly in agriculture, I avoid using cables due to the risk of thunderstorm damage, so wireless deployment is preferred.

The time taken depends on the number of devices being set up. The first device might take a few hours, but subsequent devices can be set up in as little as 20 minutes and sometimes even in five minutes.

I rate the process a seven out of ten.

Ubiquiti WLAN supports operations in applications like agriculture and light industry where interconnectivity is required. It's typically used for local LAN applications rather than Internet-based operations, though it does rely on Internet infrastructure.

I rate it an eight out of ten. 

We use Ubiquiti WLAN solutions for point-to-point configurations and wireless networks within our internal Wi-Fi infrastructure. These solutions are primarily used for point-to-point wireless integration.

You can use the Ubiquiti WLAN with the UniFi wireless controller software. This software can be purchased, downloaded from the website, and installed to manage Wi-Fi networks. One notable advantage is the ease of obtaining and implementing updates. Updates can be downloaded from the same site, making it convenient to keep devices updated.

There are some issues with specific products like airFiber and SIBAP. However, UniFi, EdgeMAX, and UniFi Protect offer more organic potential for addressing concerns like lightning strikes and optimizing WLAN installations in high-voltage regions. Despite competition in the market, there's uncertainty about the efficacy of these devices, particularly in terms of licensing.

I have been using Ubiquiti WLAN since 2016.

The product is stable. Sometimes, it shows from the public environment of access.

I rate the solution’s stability a five out of ten.

100 users are using this solution.

The initial setup is easy but depends on your knowledge. It takes 15-20 minutes to install.

I rate the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The solution is cost-saving.

I rate the product’s pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

Ubiquiti WLAN makes it easy to group access points, manage traffic efficiently, ensure connectivity, generate reports, and facilitate maintenance and troubleshooting.

The equipment is quite very easy to understand and use. It should increase the capacity to improve the analytical part.

Many wireless devices are attempting to automatically detect interference issues. Working towards automatic interference detection and frequency shifting for stability is crucial at this point. This approach could potentially simplify licensing and operational concerns. 

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

On-premises

Firstly, I initially purchased the device to build a VPN, and one very valuable feature for me was the ability to create a layer two VPN, which was available on the legacy ER router. It allowed me to expand a subnet to a remote site, which was essential for my setup. Additionally, I appreciated that the CLI of the router was similar to other Juniper products that I was familiar with. As for my current setup, I'm using it as a wireless controller and a camera DVR. I plan to purchase newer-generation routers for building VPNs between sites. However, my infrastructure running on the ER routers is sufficient for now, and I haven't faced any issues requiring replacement parts. I am also happy with its performance. 

The solution should improve stability. 

I have been using the product for five years.

I rate the tool's stability a seven to eight out of ten. I encountered a few issues where I had to perform hard restarts. During power outages, it sometimes loses parts of the configuration, particularly with the OpenVPN solution. In one instance, the panel didn't come up automatically as expected. There was also an issue where one device lost its configuration entirely, requiring manual intervention via CLI to restore it. I rate it a ten out of ten. 

The product is scalable. My company has 50 users. 

I haven't used the tool's technical support. 

I used Cisco, Juniper, Fortinet, and Check Point. We chose Ubiquiti WLAN since it was ten times cheaper than other products. 

Ubiquiti WLAN's deployment is straightforward. I unboxed the device, connected it to the network, and configured the port to operate as a trunk, providing the necessary tags. Then, I integrated it into the control system.

The tool's deployment was done in-house. 

The tool's licensing costs are life-time charges. 

I rate Ubiquiti WLAN a nine out of ten. 

On-premises

We use Ubiquiti WLAN to connect for business purposes. We have nursing homes, and our nursing staff uses devices to enter residence data. Also, our residents are using these WiFi access points for private use. We also use the solution for resident internet.

First of all, Ubiquiti WLAN is fixing our needs. The solution helps us to have more than one VLAN. The solution has enough power for a number of simultaneous connections. The solution can be centrally managed to some extent.

Ruckus access points were not available to us for more than one year. It took us 12 to 18 months to get the Ruckus access points. Ubiquiti WLAN has good availability, and it is much cheaper. Ubiquiti WLAN doesn't have the exact same performance and features as Ruckus. However, we don't have the same requirements as Ruckus in the countries where we use Ubiquiti WLAN.

The solution should include and expand on a central management system. The higher the number of sites where you use such access or devices, the higher the requirement to have the option to manage them centrally. A central management can be used not just for monitoring but also to push firmware updates and configuration changes.

I got feedback from one of the bigger international customers of Ubiquiti, an international Internet service provider, that they would like to see a central management system for Ubiquiti WLAN.

We have been using Ubiquiti WLAN in our company for roughly one year.

Ubiquiti WLAN is a very stable solution, and we had no stability issues.

The solution's scalability is quite fine. Around 200 to 250 users are using Ubiquiti WLAN in our organization.

I rate Ubiquiti WLAN an eight out of ten for scalability.

Sometimes, we need two to three Virtual LANs for more complex configurations. Depending on the use case, if we need a more extended central management system for several hundred access points, then I prefer Ruckus.

However, if we don't have a large size, then Ubiquiti is a real option for us. From a price-to-performance ratio, Ubiquiti WLAN is better than Ruckus for our needs in the countries where we use it. Ruckus is more expensive than Ubiquiti WLAN.

The solution's initial setup is simple.

On a scale of one to ten, where one is expensive, and ten is cheap, I rate Ubiquiti WLAN's pricing a five to six out of ten.

Overall, I rate Ubiquiti WLAN a nine out of ten.

The most valuable features of the solution are that traffic management is very easy and setting up VPNs is a very straightforward process.

The logs are not detailed enough. You can't clearly see what is being blocked in Ubiquiti WLAN, making the troubleshooting process a little bit harder. The aforementioned areas can be considered for improvement.

I have been using Ubiquiti WLAN for six months. I use the solution's latest version, which is Ubiquiti WLAN UDM-Pro. My company has a reseller agreement with Ubiquiti.

It is a very stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten since it lacks firewall redundancy.

In my company, Ubiquiti WLAN has about 35 users.

I haven't contacted the solution's technical support since I could only resolve one issue with Ubiquiti WLAN's forum. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

I have previously used pfSense.

My company chose Ubiquiti WLAN since it looks pretty and provides the best way to let the customer see value in the solution.

The initial setup of Ubiquiti WLAN was easy. I rate the setup phase a ten on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The deployment process was done in around 20 minutes with the help of minimal staff members. One can provision them remotely and then install them live on-site.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

For what the product is, it is cheap, but it is not the cheapest, which is annoying. I rate the pricing an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive.

To those planning to use the product, they need to investigate VoIP and its quality of service.

Ubiquiti WLAN is easy to use and visually pleasing, but it lacks detailed logs.

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

On-premises