We performed a comparison between Cisco DNA Center and Juniper Mist Wired Assurance based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Network Management Applications solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most valuable features were the monitoring, maintenance, and configuration."
"DNA Center is scalable."
"We can monitor all devices and get the required information using the product."
"It offers automation, security enforcement, analytics, and integration with other Cisco technologies, making it a key driver for efficient network operations and compliance with security protocols."
"I think that their LAN automation is a very good feature."
"People like to use the dashboards to get an overview of their network."
"The best feature of Cisco DNA Center is the visibility page, where you can see everything on the dashboard, and you don't have to be a technical person to view the issues."
"The product offers an intuitive and automated way to manage user networks. It gives me an insight into the network health."
"The product greatly improved our organization in terms of making configuration, deployment, and firmware upgrades easy for multiple automated devices."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist Wired Assurance is zero-touch provisioning for query edge switches. You can connect the switch directly to your edge locations and then directly onboard, similar to the Cisco Meraki solutions."
"The solution's integration feature can be better."
"What could be improved is the licensing cost of Cisco DNA Center. It's a little bit expensive."
"There is a limitation with the number of VRFs that you can have in your network, and this has caused us problems with some customers."
"From the recent DNA point of view, there are some stability challenges with Cisco, but very minor."
"DNA Center has been on the market for a few years and they need to update it."
"We encountered issues with their response times, which had a big impact on our workflow."
"The solution's technical support is an area with which my company's clients have a problem. Cisco doesn't provide good technical support unless a user has a big account that Cisco wants to retain."
"The weaknesses primarily involve pricing and the ongoing need for increased bandwidth and data throughput."
"The platform’s monitoring tool is not up to the mark. It is not proactive enough and lacks some capabilities. Additionally, they should work on providing integration with other vendors."
"The configuration aspect of the solutions is relatively new, but I have had positive experiences. However, for more advanced tasks, such as VXLANs on the EX platform, Juniper Mist Wired Assurance may not be the best option due to certain limitations. Nonetheless, it does have a CLI override feature for specialized configurations that cannot be done through the GUI."
Cisco DNA Center is ranked 1st in Network Management Applications with 37 reviews while Juniper Mist Wired Assurance is ranked 14th in Network Management Applications with 2 reviews. Cisco DNA Center is rated 7.8, while Juniper Mist Wired Assurance is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco DNA Center writes "Practical implementation of VXLAN is good and provides centralized control". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper Mist Wired Assurance writes "Simple installation, helpful zero-touch provisioning , and quick support". Cisco DNA Center is most compared with Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave, SolarWinds Network Configuration Manager, Huawei eSight and Fortinet FortiManager, whereas Juniper Mist Wired Assurance is most compared with Junos Space Network Director, ExtremeCloud IQ, Cisco Prime, Aruba Airwave and HPE Intelligent Management Center. See our Cisco DNA Center vs. Juniper Mist Wired Assurance report.
See our list of best Network Management Applications vendors.
We monitor all Network Management Applications reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.