We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Ruckus 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."The most valuable feature is the ease of setup and deployment."
"I would rate the stability a ten out of ten."
"The installation process was easy."
"There is a clustering feature, so the APs immediately switch back to the next available controller. The users will not notice any impact and will feel connected to the network. They will not notice any disconnection."
"The initial setup of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN can be done quickly, and everything functions smoothly."
"The product gives good stability and concurrency."
"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."
"In the event of a controller appliance failure or downtime, the system seamlessly transitions control to any access point acting as a backup controller."
"The solution is suitable for many types of environments, such as small businesses."
"The product is very user-friendly."
"The solution can scale well."
"Scalability is a valuable feature."
"The technical features are very good and it's very useful if you need a wireless solution."
"The solution is easy to use and offers good management for wireless."
"We use things like VLAN and all the multibeam features that are built in, but at the end of the day, the most important thing for us is to get a good signal and site-wide coverage."
"What I like best about Ruckus Wireless WAN is easy administration. After installation, you'll benefit from how easy it is to administer the product. I also like that the product can cover the whole area with just a few endpoints."
"Sometimes, the configuration part of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN can be complex, and if you fail to understand the product at once, you may not even know about some features that you can apply to your network, and they may go unused."
"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."
"It is a little bit cumbersome to configure. If you're designing a WLAN and you want to do and cover certain types of clients, you really have to know different settings and how they interact with one another. If they could automate that so that if you are designing for one type of equipment, you could, in essence, run a wizard. That would certainly save on a lot of calls to tech support."
"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."
"This product needs more flecibility with switching technologies."
"Device integration has room for improvement in Aruba Networks Wireless WAN."
"The solution has bugs. It really has bugs, and you have to wait until it happens, then you realize it."
"The customization options could be improved."
"The solution could be more stable."
"The connectivity and mobility for users could be improved."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
"The solution needs to offer more analytics."
"We have one sole distributor here in our region. To have multiple distributors here would be very helpful to improve the supply chain."
"I would like to see IoT device support available with WiFi six. IoT is used by all businesses. They are now using IoT devices. It is required."
"In Cisco, there is a configuration where it automatically switches from the 2.4 GHz to 5.2 GHz frequency. But with Ruckus, usually, we need to manually define whether we want to use the 2.4 GHz or 5.2 GHz."
"The pricing needs to be reconsidered because it's expensive."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 46 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Ruckus Wireless WAN 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 Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Ubiquiti Wireless, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless and Cambium Networks Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus 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.