We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiExtender and Ubiquiti Wireless based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Management can be carried out from a central point."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"For me, the best feature of Fortinet FortiExtender is its integration with an external solution such as a 5G LTE broadband modem, wired modem, and cellular network. I also like that the product can be integrated into one device or a unified device, and that is one of its best features because it allows you to manage and centralize the control of every device."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"Having dual-band is important. Having compatibility with very old equipment on certain frequencies, for example on 2.4 and 5.8."
"This access point provides internet to every lab on campus, including the computer laboratory"
"Ubiquiti Wireless is easy to use, it's stable and flexible, and the performance is great. It is scalable as well."
"The solution offers us good situational awareness by providing information on user activity, signal strength, and all the data that you need to manage the system and understand issues."
"The ease of the setup is one of its most valuable aspects."
"The setup is easy and user friendly."
"The failure rate is very low on these devices - I've had them installed for five years and have only lost one out of a hundred."
"The UniFi Controller Software provides excellent statistical and monitoring facilities."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"The support could be faster and more responsive."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
"The documentation and support provided by the solution areas of concern where improvements are required."
"The solution needs to improve its features and offer more to the customer."
"The strength of the routers could be improved. When it comes to serious routing, the solution doesn't measure up to the big guys like Juniper and Cisco, but we don't expect it to."
"Performance could be improved in the solution because when I compare it with Ruckus and other APs, some of those APs are better performing, so you don't have to deploy too many APs to get the same level of Wi-Fi coverage and stability. It's not about how many clients the solution can handle, but it is more about stability and coverage. Another room for improvement in Ubiquiti Wireless, compared to other brands, is that it doesn't do well when used in an office network. It has a limitation on how reliable the AP of the system is."
"Central monitoring is the main functionality that should be included in the product."
"Tech support is mostly remote and could be better."
"t does not have traffic shaping or traffic policies in its wireless requirements."
"We'd like them to improve aspects of device management."
Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ubiquiti Wireless writes "It's cheap and easy to use but isn't suitable for large deployments or complex use cases ". Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Aruba Wireless and ExtremeCloud IQ. See our Fortinet FortiExtender vs. Ubiquiti Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.