We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Ruckus Wireless based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: As competitors, Cisco Wireless and Ruckus Wireless come in at a close tie. Both products offer a really strong set of features. However, their pricing is where each stands out, with Cisco being more expensive and Ruckus being affordable. In addition, users of Ruckus Wireless report seeing an immediate ROI.
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"The simplicity is great."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The solution is very secure."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is its security"
"Wireless connectivity is the main feature. It is also securely integrated with ISE, which is valuable because, in the banking industry, we also cover the security aspect. This Wi-Fi controller integrates with the ISE system that we have. Every user that comes on the wireless needs to log in with the domain. If they don't, it will not allow the user to join the network. This is the key feature of this solution."
"The FlexConnect feature is the most valuable."
"We've found the technical support to be helpful and responsive."
"The most important thing for me is that all the access points are in one group and use one access code. So, when you move from one area to another, you don't disconnect and reconnect again. The device is also very easy to install and control."
"It can provide support for real-time applications, such as VoIP and Video Conferencing over wireless infrastructure."
"The product is compatible with a lot of mobile devices."
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"The solution has an easy configuration."
"One of the most valuable features I appreciate is auto channelization, facilitated by a proprietary product called ChannelFly."
"I haven't heard any complaints about the WiFi equipment at all causing problems."
"Once we got it set up and configured we've had little issues and it's been relatively stable. We use it across all seven of our offices and they all have the exact same wifi setup so when I go into any office I can get on the network and access resources."
"The solution provides superior coverage."
"The solution has many innovative features."
"Our IT staff can quickly issue guest passes for vendors and the instructions are very straightforward, requiring very little effort to get connected."
"Dead zones were immediately eliminated when we deployed these WAPs in all of our locations, plus Ruckus’ analytics on the ZoneDirectors allow us to quickly identify clients that are taking too much bandwidth."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The price of Cisco Wireless could be lower."
"Cisco Wireless does not have a dashboard that would make it easier for people to manage the solution, such as Cisco Meraki where you are able to monitor the network through the dashboard and everything is visible making it easier."
"The stability could improve, there are some issues. We were told the version of the software we are using on all of the controllers is best for Cisco IOS, but we might need to update our software, this might fix the stability issues we are experiencing."
"I wouldn't mind if Cisco allowed their premiere devices to be able to have that cloud-based support as well, or cloud-based management."
"There are performance issues, particularly with video calls where throughput is not great."
"The reporting of the product could be improved. When I needed to troubleshoot, I couldn't get sufficient information from the controller."
"There is room for improvement regarding HA issues and Radius integration."
"The flexibility on the controllers isn't that great."
"They lack in some hardware stratification."
"It could be cheaper."
"The solution needs to have some sort of security offering, like a firewall, for example."
"The initial setup could be more straightforward. It would be better if we could seamlessly integrate security tools like a firewall or IPS with Ruckus Wireless."
"It would be better if there were more visibility on the cloud. We have some lack of visibility because of wireless interference, and you have to do some troubleshooting for the packet capture. They have a built-in packet capture, and we can monitor the application. You can see all things over the cloud. They also provide an on-premise solution, so they need to improve the on-premise version and ensure an output with more visibility. Live monitoring in a live environment should be good. What is happening with wireless is that the wireless client is not connected due to interference, and there should be a shield zone on their wireless cloud. If they give us more features on both Ruckus Cloud or on-premises, that will be best. Nowadays, security is more important for everyone using wireless technology. If they implement a little bit of reduction and prevention features for some packets on the wireless cloud, some features like web filtering and some prevention for blocking will be good for the network."
"I recommend enhancing flexibility for administrators within the Partner Domain."
"It would be helpful to have a wizard when you are setting up a new access point or a wireless guest network."
"We would like to see a better licensing model for our customers."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Ruckus Wireless is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 97 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Wireless is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless writes "Great wireless, good reliability, and excellent connectivity". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Mist AI and Cloud and Omada Access Points, whereas Ruckus Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN, ExtremeWireless and Omada Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Ruckus Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless LAN 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.
They both do a great job. But it depends on the application scenario.
For corporate environments probably Cisco will perform better not only because of Cisco Wi-Fi features but especially because you can be integrated with all Cisco infrastructure and manage it all.
In heavy-duty environments, like public hot-spot, stadiums, exhibition centers, etc, Ruckus should be considered. In this type of applications, pure Wi-Fi performance is more important than management features or security, and therefore, it could be the better choice.
If you care more about performance and stable communications, Ruckus Wireless is definitely better.
Ruckus Wireless APs have;
- Adaptive antenna technology (called BeamFlex). This technology analyzes different paths to reach the client and electronically turns itself to a directional antenna, choosing the path that gives the best performance to reach each specific client. If the client is mobile or if the environment changes (such as a warehouse) the selection of paths/direction also changes instantly.
Transmitting in a directional way allows a good Signal-to-Noise Ratio and also causes less interference for other nearby APs outside the path of the directional transmission.
- ChannelFly technology. This technology chooses the best channel based on performance rather than background scanning for noise.
- Polarization Diversity. This technology allows the clients not to lose signal strength when held at different angles (important for mobile devices such as tablets and telephones).
- Better receive sensitivity compared to the competitors.
All these features make Ruckus Wireless a better choice than any other competitor (better performance, better coverage area, more stable and surprise-free communication especially in not so easy conditions such as noise, too many clients, too much traffic).