We compared Ruckus Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Ruckus Wireless WAN is commended for its excellent signal strength and network stability, while Ubiquiti Wireless is praised for its reliable connections and ease of installation. Ruckus offers robust security measures, scalability, and advanced troubleshooting capabilities, while Ubiquiti is noted for its user-friendly interface and security features. Customers find Ruckus's pricing competitive and appreciate its strong ROI, while Ubiquiti is valued for its cost-effectiveness and positive impact on productivity. Critics suggest Ruckus improve network stability and management options, while Ubiquiti could focus on signal strength and reliability enhancements.
Features: Ruckus Wireless WAN stands out for its excellent signal strength and coverage, seamless connectivity, and advanced troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, Ubiquiti Wireless excels in its ease of installation and setup, user-friendly interface, and flexible scalability options.
Pricing and ROI: Ruckus Wireless WAN has been praised for its reasonable and competitive pricing, with minimal installation costs. Users find the licensing process flexible. On the other hand, customers consider Ubiquiti Wireless to offer good value for the cost, with straightforward setup and no additional expenses. The licensing process is described as uncomplicated and hassle-free., The ROI from Ruckus Wireless WAN was highly positive. Users praised the ease of installation and setup, as well as the scalable solution. On the other hand, Ubiquiti Wireless offers cost-effectiveness and advanced security features. Users appreciate the improved connectivity and faster speeds.
Room for Improvement: Ruckus Wireless WAN could improve network stability, reliability, management options, configuration options, troubleshooting capabilities, and customer support. Meanwhile, Ubiquiti Wireless needs enhancements in signal strength, coverage, reliability, and stability.
Deployment and customer support: User reviews of Ruckus Wireless WAN indicate varying durations for deployment, setup, and implementation. Some users spent three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others completed both in a week. For Ubiquiti Wireless, some users took three months for deployment and a week for setup, while others took a week for each. The context in which users use these terms should be considered., Ruckus Wireless WAN is known for its reliable support system and efficient problem resolution. In comparison, Ubiquiti Wireless excels at providing excellent customer service, with knowledgeable and patient support personnel who offer prompt and helpful assistance.
The summary above is based on 58 interviews we conducted recently with Ruckus Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"Ruckus Wireless WAN is simple to use. Its coverage is better than other tools."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN’s most valuable feature is unleashed."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN is an easy-to-use solution."
"The connectivity is good. There's no lag at all in service."
"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 most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology."
"I made some comparisons with other competitors and I found that Ruckus was number one in regards to stability."
"The analytic solution is good and should be improving further."
"I would say that the user experience is pretty good in this solution as well as the roaming solution part of it."
"Ubiquiti is intuitive. The management interface is user-friendly. You can easily make changes and do the things that need to be done."
"It's an excellent option for small businesses."
"The pricing of the solution is excellent. It offers a great value."
"The most valuable aspect of Ubiquiti is the ease of setup. It's easy to set up, secure, and use. It works on an adoption basis. I can pull the system up, design a network, and pull 20 different Ubiquiti units into it."
"We have found the product to be scalable."
"What I found most valuable in Ubiquiti Wireless is that it's priced competitively, compared to other brands available in the market. From a price competitiveness standpoint, it's a product I would recommend. I also find Ubiquiti Wireless quite reliable, at least for me using it as a home access point, it seems to serve its purpose. I also like that with Ubiquiti Wireless, you can build a very modular network, so you could change out your router to use a Ubiquiti router if you want to. The solution also has gateway equipment and all, so I like the modular concept of Ubiquiti Wireless. Another feature I find valuable in the solution is monitoring. It is pretty good. For example, as a home user, I have the unified app on my computer, so I'm able to watch how my APs are performing."
"It's very easy to use. The hardware is very easy to use, compared to Microsoft. Microsoft is more complicated. It has software that is okay if you are familiar with it. In my opinion, Ubiquiti hardware is more heavy duty then Microsoft."
"The captive portal should be more customizable because right now, it is very limited."
"In Cisco, there is a configuration where it automatically switches from the 2.4 GHz to 5.2 GHz frequency. But with Ruckus, usually, we need to manually define whether we want to use the 2.4 GHz or 5.2 GHz."
"What needs improvement in Ruckus Wireless WAN is the initial setup. It could be easier. Availability is also another area for improvement in the product. Another huge disadvantage of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the cost you must continuously pay for the licenses."
"The stability of the solution could improve in an upcoming release."
"The pricing of Ruckus Wireless WAN is an area of concern. Ruckus Wireless WAN should slash its current price to match the prices offered by its competitors."
"It would be nice to some analytical features built into this solution."
"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 solution needs to offer more analytics."
"I would like to see more cloud features that some of the other competitors such as Cisco Meraki have that are very nice."
"The technical support services need improvement."
"We'd like them to improve aspects of device management."
"Central monitoring is the main functionality that should be included in the product."
"t does not have traffic shaping or traffic policies in its wireless requirements."
"The product lacks some security features."
"Ubiquiti Wireless could improve by being more user-friendly and easy to use."
"Sometimes we have some micro breaks we do not know what causes them."
Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". 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 ". Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Aruba Wireless, ExtremeCloud IQ and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our Ruckus Wireless WAN 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.
yes. aprox. same issues at the half price
yes