We compared Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Cisco Wireless is praised for its robust network connectivity, seamless roaming capabilities, and excellent security measures, while Huawei Wireless stands out for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, and reliable signal strength. Cisco Wireless receives positive feedback on customer service and support, setup cost, and licensing, leading to a highly satisfactory return on investment. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless users appreciate its sleek design, user-friendly interface, and long battery life, along with efficient customer service and competitive pricing. Areas for improvement for Cisco Wireless include signal strength, security features, and user interface, while Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength and device compatibility.
Features: Cisco Wireless is valued for robust network connectivity, seamless roaming, reliable performance, excellent security measures, and user-friendly management interfaces. Huawei Wireless is praised for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, user-friendly interface, and reliable signal strength.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Cisco Wireless is reported to be manageable and user-friendly, while Huawei Wireless is acknowledged to have a straightforward and hassle-free setup cost. Additionally, users mention the flexibility and options provided by Cisco's licensing, while Huawei's licensing is easily obtained and offers usage flexibility., According to user feedback, the ROI from Cisco Wireless has been highly satisfactory, while Huawei Wireless has contributed positively to our return on investment.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Wireless may need improvements in signal strength, security features, user interface, reliability, and connection speed. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength, compatibility, user interface, and durability.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Cisco Wireless mention varying timeframes for deployment and setup, ranging from three months for deployment and an additional week for setup to a week for both deployment and setup. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless reviews also mention varying durations, with some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others spending a week each on both deployment and setup, suggesting that these terms may refer to the same period., Cisco Wireless products have received high praise for their customer service and support. Users have expressed satisfaction with prompt and helpful assistance, efficient and responsive support staff, and an overall positive experience. Similarly, Huawei Wireless products have also been highly praised for their customer service and support. Users appreciate the prompt and helpful resolution of issues, the expertise and knowledge of the support team, and the professional and efficient customer service experience.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The solution is very secure."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"The most valuable feature for us is management of the systems. We can easily access all features."
"The most valuable feature of the solution stems from the fact that it can be integrated into other solutions in a particular environment, including where there are wired and wireless connections."
"The installation process is very easy."
"The most important thing for me is that all the access points are in one group and use one access code. So, when you move from one area to another, you don't disconnect and reconnect again. The device is also very easy to install and control."
"The tool is mainly improving our productivity."
"The LAN network conductivity is good."
"This solution is highly stable. We have only had one issue in seven years."
"What I like most about Huawei Wireless is that it's customizable. It has many unique features, such as encryption, spatial streams, hiding features for different scenarios, low-density and high-density areas, and smart antennas."
"It is based on 802.11ax, which is a new technology. There are several valuable things, such as its speed and mobility. There are options for self-organizing networking so that it can perform operations and maintain itself. Its three interfaces are very good and user friendly."
"It has all of the features that we need."
"It can scale."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its simplicity."
"The solution offers very good value for money."
"The solution is easily managed compared to other wireless solutions."
"From an implementation perspective, it's easy. I rate it a nine on a scale of one to ten, where one is a difficult setup, and ten is an easy setup."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"The solution is expensive."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The price could be better."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The technical support could be better. They aren't as helpful as they need to be when we run into issues."
"There's a delay in equipment that comes to Columbia, to our country, and that lasts almost six months."
"Older versions used to be hard to deploy. The latest OS, however, has made things a lot easier. While deployment is much better, it could always be even easier."
"The stability could improve, there are some issues. We were told the version of the software we are using on all of the controllers is best for Cisco IOS, but we might need to update our software, this might fix the stability issues we are experiencing."
"What my company doesn't like about the product is related to the coverage it provides to access points, an area which is one of the most important ones for us."
"Code stability is something that needs to be improved."
"Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types."
"When you integrate a network access control with authentication with an ISE engine it's really complicated to put in place."
"The scalability could be a bit better."
"As such, there are no problems. It has been good. There were some issues with the network design, but that is not specifically related to the product. We had to make some improvements in the network design. The product as such is fine, and there are no big issues. We are using the latest version having most of the features available in the industry, so the specs are very high. If something new comes up new in the industry, it needs to be incorporated into the product."
"Huawei Wireless has a small technical problem. When you use a power injector, it needs to be specially configured for the switch to which it is connected. It tries to take power not from the power injector but from the switch. The funny thing when you look at it is that you have three switches or maybe four or five that are theoretically capable. However, the port on these switches is disabled. When you connect the access point to a power injector, the access point checks for features from the switch, but on this port, the switch doesn't do power. So, the access point changes these features to energy save mode and cuts off some features, especially WiFi 6. It took me two weeks to find out what's going on and how to mitigate this sort of problem. It is very easy to fix. You need to disable LLDP on the port on which you connect the access point to the power injector. Power injectors aren't quite commonly used, but I have 54 access points, and I have used about 27 power injectors. So, about half of the access points were working at reduced speed, not full speed, for two weeks."
"Support could be a bit faster."
"I'd like to see some after-sales support. It's a little bit below the expectations we had."
"I have encountered connectivity issues with the tool. I am not sure if it is due to Wi-Fi inference. I would like the solution to include some marketing analytics features like evaluation of user behavior."
"This solution has issues with bugs and instability."
"The security of the solution could be better in the future."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Huawei Wireless is ranked 9th in Wireless LAN with 33 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Huawei Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Huawei Wireless writes "Customizable and has many unique features, such as encryption, spatial streams, and smart antennas". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Omada Access Points, whereas Huawei Wireless is most compared with D-Link Wireless, Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Ruckus Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Huawei Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless LAN 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.
All are good selections, and this question is difficult to answer without knowing your throughput requirements, as each vendor has multiple models within there series.
Personally I recommend looking at Arista Networks’ cognitive Wifi, where controllers are a thing of the past.
Ruckus virtual smart zone will be your best bet allowing up to 300k connected devices and 30k access points. furthermore, Ruckus has time and again proven best in speed, throughput in high density environments by independent studies. I have over a decade of working with this product and none of the other competitors can beat the layer 1 connectivity of Ruckus WiFi
Hi,
Every one of the mentioned solutions is good but you need to check the needs which are security since the firms you are working with need protection and tracking of data. For this reason, I recommend:
- if you have FortiGate installed then go for Fortinet Wireless since they can be integrated with the Fortigate without buying a controller and they work perfectly together and you will get the advantage of applying rules to the client himself whether mobile or computer, easily managed & monitored, more visibility over your network and incident notifications.
If the above doesn't apply then you can go with the best one that fits your budget and security needs which for me doesn't fall on the mentioned solution but to go with ARUBA Instant Access Wireless Solution and the reasons are as such:
- Cisco is too much expensive and you got to pay smart support with some complexity in configuration and you need to buy a controller
- Ruckus is good but when you want to have the security you need to buy a controller with licenses and it won't give you the security needed since it is just a wireless solution
- Huawei is not a stable company since it had many ups and downs and they can reach with you to have all the solutions nearly free so that you install their brand.
Whereas Aruba you don't need a controller in the Instant access points and you will get the minimum security with radius integration and what is important a lifetime warranty on the access points.
In addition, if the number of access points increased and you want more detailed management and more advanced configurations, you can buy a controller either on-premises or on-cloud with Aruba.
The above information is based on my experience with all the solutions and their POC.
If you need any more details and consultancy, kindly feel free to contact me.
Regards.
Hi Imad,
Thanks for your input. Do you have any POC data for Cisco and Aruba?
Thanks in advance
Boa tarde
As soluções cada solução que você indicou tem pormenores que podem impactar tanto no funcionamento quanto em caso de disaster recovery.
Fortinet: Possui bons access points, aliado às funcionalidades de segurança do próprio UTM, porém será mais um serviço para o appliance gerenciar, e dependendo do que está rodando nele, corre-se o risco de degradar a performance da funcionalidade principal "segurança", por que tambem está gerenciando uma rede wireless, além do fato se houver alguma pane no appliance Fortinet, tanto os itens de segurança quanto a rede wireless irão ficar indisponível. Dê a Cézar o que é de Cézar, deixe a fortinet focada em segurança, que é o que ela faz de melhor.
Ruckus: Excelentes Access points, confiáveis e com alta performance, possui no mínimo 4 opções de gerência, sendo, controlerless Unleashed, appliance virtual, appliance hardware e cloud, ambas as opções não trará prejuizo à performance da rede wireless, porque não há tunelamento de dados para elas, além de possuir várias funções de segurança inerentes à rede wireless. licenças são perpétuas.
Cisco: Excelente access points, porém solução muito cara para aquisição e renovação.
Huawei: Pelo que conheço, tem bons access points, e controladoras virtuais e appliance físico, mas conheço poucas redes com esta solução.
É lógico que uma tem um recurso extra a mais do que a outra, mas considero mera perfumaria, pois o básico para uma rede wireless segura todas atendem.
Eu já atendi a mais de 40 universidades federais no Brasil, todas com Ruckus, e não há reclamação da solução.
Como recomendação pessoal, vá de Ruckus.
Hi,
It is all dependent on the size of the controllers in question. Though I would suggest getting a cloud base technology so you are limited by any controller and have much better redundancy. Take a look at Arista Cognitive Wireless