We performed a comparison between Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Cisco 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."One could say that Cambium is a scalable solution."
"When we log in to the device, we can easily configure it. So it is quite user-friendly."
"It is easy to deploy, and it is not that complicated. There are a lot of systems that are very complicated, and they require a special kind of training. Their response is also very slow, especially with the Chinese vendors, but with Cambium, we have not faced any issues. Everything is going well in terms of cooperation from Cambium. We are happy with them, their services, their cooperation, and their quick response. They are just amazing."
"The claim management feature is exceedingly simple."
"What I find valuable is the fact that you don't need to purchase any license. Basically you just get the hardware for the access points, configure an IP and connect it with a switch."
"It eliminates the need for additional controllers, reducing costs."
"It is highly scalable. I would rate the scalability a ten out of ten."
"The solution's coverage range is good, it is easy to use, and deployment is very easy and user-friendly."
"Provides good visibility and insights into what is happening."
"Mobile anchoring and graphic user interface are helpful features."
"I use Cisco because of its reliability."
"The program is very stable."
"The most valuable features are CleanAir, Rogue Detection, and the auto-calculation of RF."
"We don't see many troubleshooting issues. Normally, it's a user error when it comes to the JSS or the VPN. Once they log into the system or they get on the internet, then they log directly into the JSS, so they can do their work."
"I am impressed with the tool's packet tracing so that connection with the devices is always consistent."
"The most valuable feature of Cisco Wireless WAN is the ease of management."
"Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is stable but sometimes the 2.4 gigahertz network is sometimes not as stable as the 5 gigahertz. The 5 gigahertz works smoothly with everything, but 2.4 has some problems. If we change the configuration I am not sure if it would fix the problem."
"The installation is difficult."
"Sometimes there are some latencies in devices. Otherwise, it is, for some time, not as stable."
"They could enhance the product's security features, particularly in analyzing and protecting against potential threats."
"There is no good technical support available for Cambium Networks Wireless WAN."
"The range of the product is disappointing so far."
"The Wifi coverage and throughput performance of Cambium could improve."
"Cambium Networks Wireless WAN could improve by providing a better signal range."
"The new platform of Cisco Wireless WAN I did not like, there weren't many features available. The online platform has more options."
"Cisco Wireless WAN would be improved with the ability to monitor new usernames, product registrations, and flow traffic."
"Technical support could be more helpful."
"The reporting feature needs improvement, especially adding information with regards to availability uptime."
"The support of the product is an area of concern where improvements are required."
"The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive."
"There are limitations on the SSIDs that could improve. We cannot enable two ways of authenticating users on one SSID. For a number of places, we have to provide different modes of certification for the user which requires us to create another SSID for the broadcast."
"The cloud interoperability needs improvement."
More Cambium Networks Wireless WAN Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 3rd in Wireless WAN with 24 reviews while Cisco Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 61 reviews. Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.6, while Cisco Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cambium Networks Wireless WAN writes "Provides point-to-point and point-to-multipoint connectivity and user-friendly solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless WAN writes "Widely available and has a straightforward setup". Cambium Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless, Ruckus Wireless WAN and Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, whereas Cisco Wireless WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiExtender and Ubiquiti Wireless. See our Cambium Networks Wireless WAN vs. Cisco 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.