We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender 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."All the features are available, even including the security. The access point enables the matching of any connectivity."
"I like the way that it integrates with the ClearPass security system on-site."
"It’s very stable and reliable."
"I like the solution's ability to add multiple SSIDs on different levels such as enterprise and guest networks."
"They offer per-user tunneling to a variety of endpoints."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is centralized management capability. You don't have to have wireless LAN controllers at every location."
"The solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great."
"Aruba Wireless's best feature is that it's very, very robust."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"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 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."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"It works. We don't look at it any deeper than that and don't find any features ar missing."
"Support is a little expensive. It's also a little tricky to configure Aruba sometimes. For example, if we want to whitelist a device, it works in unexpected ways. I want to allow this device to connect somewhere, and it lets it connect to any device in the network. Let's say I want to allow my phone to connect to the network printer, but if I add my phone to the white list, I automatically allow my phone to connect to any other devices, and it's not secure."
"The solution currently has a Windows update problem."
"This solution needs different models that are more specialized for certain customers."
"The issue is that we are unable to update it because we lack the necessary permissions. We set up the website, but we don't have permission to download the software."
"When it comes to configuring rules for file security tests, any issues that arise can be referred to as "glitches". Despite the extensive configurations required, the process itself is not overly complicated."
"Its technical support service could be better."
"In a meshed environment, the handoff between access points is sometimes not smooth when users are mobile. For example, a connection is occasionally interrupted when a user takes their laptop from the gym to the cafeteria."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"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."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 47 reviews while Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN writes "It's reliable, cost-effective, and easy to troubleshoot". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Ubiquiti Wireless, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Fortinet FortiExtender 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.