We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Omada Access Points based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The simplicity is great."
"Juniper Mist offers valuable features like comprehensive network insight, granular policy control, fast device setup, strong security, and efficient SSL traffic management."
"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."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"It is a very scalable solution."
"Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support."
"With Cisco Wireless we have DNA technology for the frequency in which it operates, so that in case of any frequency interference it can look for and switch to another frequency, where there no interference."
"The ability to disable RRM or set hybrid RRM provides a more granular design of RF in the environment."
"Cisco Wireless technology allows us to logically segregate networks, to segregate the traffic between multiple types of endpoint devices, connected to the network. For example, corporate laptops are connected to one network, corporate iPhones will go through a different network."
"The product has valuable features for integration and authentication."
"I find this solution easy to configure and use."
"It is good, and it works."
"This product is easy to use."
"Omada Access Points are very good in terms of wired technologies and wired connectivity."
"The solution's most valuable feature is its price."
"The initial setup is not complicated."
"The most valuable feature of TP-Link Auranet EAP is its high performance."
"Its sturdiness and cost-effectiveness are the most valuable features."
"The solution has been dependable and has kept up with modern technology."
"When this solution is set up, it is solid. It offers fast deployment."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
"The solution is expensive."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types."
"Older versions are complex to configure and implement."
"The price could be better."
"Cisco Wireless does not have a dashboard that would make it easier for people to manage the solution, such as Cisco Meraki where you are able to monitor the network through the dashboard and everything is visible making it easier."
"The GUI could be made more user-friendly. There should also be a dashboard where it can showcase how many end-users are connected to a particular access point."
"If needs to provide more visibility. It can detect and do it, but as technicians we don't have a lot of visibility into seeing exactly what's happening. It doesn't give us a lot of log information for us to troubleshoot. They probably have additional software you need to purchase to get that kind of information. But I think not all companies can afford additional software to see those kinds of details. So if the wireless controller already had, built-in, those types of things for the technician or wireless engineer, it would be more attractive for the end-user."
"It's end-of-life, it will be end-of-support in the next two years. The APs are also end-of-life."
"It should be fully compatible with other devices."
"The solution takes a long time to switch to another connection, which should be improved."
"There is room for wider improvements and additional features to enhance managing capabilities."
"It's better for smaller organizations. This would not work for enterprises. It is not very scalable."
"Omada's ordering platform could be improved, though. Some of their distributors are a pain to work with."
"There should be more remote support for the mobile application."
"The price of the solution is an area requiring improvement since I want the solution to be made available at a cheaper price than its current market price."
"Upgrading the hardware capabilities to newer versions like Wi-Fi 6 or Wi-Fi 7 would be a helpful improvement."
"We have some issues with stability. It is not so fast. That is the main problem."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Omada Access Points is ranked 15th in Wireless LAN with 14 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Omada Access Points is rated 7.6. 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 Omada Access Points writes "They have good specs, and the price is lower than competing solutions". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and NETGEAR Insight Access Points, whereas Omada Access Points is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Aruba Instant and NETGEAR Insight Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Omada Access Points 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.