We performed a comparison between HPE Wireless WAN and Ruckus Wireless WAN 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."It is a good and stable solution."
"What's most valuable in HPE Wireless WAN is that it works fine for customers with existing HPE controllers."
"The most valuable features of HPE Wireless WAN are high quality and capability."
"The most valuable features of this solution are it supports the newest virus technology, which helps with bandwidth, and is very stable."
"Setting up the solution initially is very easy."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is flexibility."
"We've found the scalability to be good."
"It is a new product backed by HPE's expertise in networking and telecommunications. We can also work with 3Com products."
"The analytic solution is good and should be improving further."
"The best feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN apart from its seamless roaming feature where you roam beautifully on the network is its analytics tool that gives you so much insight into your deployment, so it has become more of a business intelligence type of tool as well. I also like that Ruckus Networks, in terms of WiFi security issues on the WiFi protocols, is also the first company to give you notices of security issues, and also the first to provide patches for those issues. Ruckus Wireless WAN is very proactive and much, much faster than Cisco, Aruba, and Meraki."
"The deployment access in the local system is about 200 access points. External access points is more. The number is huge. There about 1,000 users in total."
"The performance is very nice, the throughput is better than any other product, and it's reliable."
"The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology."
"Radio management is a valuable feature of the solution."
"We found the technical support to be helpful."
"One of the standout features is the ease of installation and commissioning, making the whole process very straightforward."
"It should be a faster device."
"The tool must warn the management about unwanted traffic."
"Technical support could be improved. They could respond a bit faster."
"I would say that the integration with other vendors in areas such as management or the visibility of other vendors in the management tools could be improved."
"HPE Wireless WAN could provide better access points and better pricing."
"Stability could be improved, and technical support needs to be faster."
"The scalability is good, but it could improve."
"The price of HPE Wireless WAN should be reduced."
"Of course, we'd always like it to be cheaper, but that's for every product."
"In comparison to Cambium, I find Cambium to be more robust in terms of performance."
"I would like to see IoT device support available with WiFi six. IoT is used by all businesses. They are now using IoT devices. It is required."
"The stability of the solution could improve in an upcoming release."
"There could be more power supply for the radio features."
"The captive portal should be more customizable because right now, it is very limited."
"The controller could be made less complicated, so those who are less technically sound can maintain it."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
HPE Wireless WAN is ranked 7th in Wireless WAN with 18 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews. HPE Wireless WAN is rated 7.8, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE Wireless WAN writes " A tool that ensures to provide seamless connectivity to its users". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". HPE Wireless WAN is most compared with , whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless and Cambium Networks Wireless WAN. See our HPE Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN 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.