We performed a comparison between Aruba Orchestrator and Cisco SD-WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."We had to deal with separate management models for Wi-Fi and switches. With Aruba Orchestrator, it's now a unified solution, making things much easier for us. We log in and manage everything from a single console. It provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting. The management process is much quicker and more streamlined."
"The most valuable feature is optimization."
"The product has reduced OpEx expenditure."
"The technical support services are excellent."
"Aruba Orchestrator has notably reduced enrollment setup times from several hours to within an hour if prepared and planned."
"The most important feature is WAN optimization."
"The Business Intent Overlay is a great feature."
"Cisco is an industry leader, so customers have a high level of trust with the brand more-so than with some newcomers that might have some more revolutionary solutions, but no name recognition."
"Cisco SD-WAN is a stable solution."
"So far, the feature that I like best is the policy configuration manager."
"The scalability is the most valuable feature."
"The initial setup is quite simple."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"The solution is great at aggregating the traffic and then sending it in one direction."
"Cisco SD-WAN is a very good product."
"The solution lacks sufficient security features."
"The initial setup is complex, depending on the overall planning for the entire environment."
"Aruba Orchestrator should implement dynamic certificate changes for security."
"The management menu should be simplified."
"The solution can be improved by lowering the cost and making it more user-friendly for first-time users."
"They could provide essential training to understand the product functionality."
"What I find should be improved is the possibility of really separating the software layer from the hardware layer since today the current offer is not well adopted by the service providers"
"We have had some problems with the licensing model, and it is something that should be improved."
"The process of onboarding the vSmart, vBond, and vManage should be improved to make it easier to manage in general."
"I would like to see a better, web-based interface to make changes to the configuration or to view statistics."
"The solution is very costly."
"The UI has room for improvement."
"The main issue is that not in the technology, but it comes back comparison. When we do a comparison with other SD WAN solutions, they are priced better."
"The product should improve its prices."
Aruba Orchestrator is ranked 13th in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 7 reviews while Cisco SD-WAN is ranked 1st in Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions with 86 reviews. Aruba Orchestrator is rated 8.6, while Cisco SD-WAN is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Aruba Orchestrator writes "Provides complete internal visibility from LAN to Wi-Fi, resulting in higher stability and easier troubleshooting". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco SD-WAN writes "A solution for integrating services to enhance up-time, performance and lower costs". Aruba Orchestrator is most compared with Juniper Session Smart Router and VMware SD-WAN, whereas Cisco SD-WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiGate, Meraki SD-WAN, VMware SD-WAN, Juniper Session Smart Router and Versa Unified Secure Access Service Edge (SASE) Platform. See our Aruba Orchestrator vs. Cisco SD-WAN report.
See our list of best Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions vendors.
We monitor all Software Defined WAN (SD-WAN) Solutions 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.