We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: Of the two solutions, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is the more popular choice with PeerSpot users. While both have great features, users of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN seem to find fewer things lacking with it and are generally satisfied. In regards to service and support as well, Cisco users are happy with the service they receive. However, users do feel that it is an expensive solution.
"The solution is stable."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. We set up the switches and APs, then took it from there. "
"The stability of Aruba Wireless has been good."
"I like the way it groups and manages access points."
"I have found the Access Point (AP) group profile feature extremely useful. It makes deployments look easy."
"The solution is secure."
"The technical support is 24/7 from the UA."
"It provides excellent performance and security through the use of available features and policies, reducing the reliance on external firewall configurations while ensuring a secure and reliable network environment."
"The most important feature is all about the two wavelengths, the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz, and the access points which are connected to this wireless controller."
"The most valuable features are the multiple types of user groupings and access management."
"The dashboard to keep track of 30 or so APs, switches, routers and logs, is invaluable. I liked the UX on this."
"The solution is stable and reliable."
"The product has been very stable over the years."
"The most valuable features are the management tools, including monitoring and reporting."
"Integrating with the router, firewall, and Wireless Controller is advantageous."
"The most valuable feature is the technology of the security that is offered."
"I like the status page Cisco added that shows you the health of the wireless connection."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"The price could be better."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"The logging is hard to read when troubleshooting issues."
"Initial setup was complex."
"There has been a recent decrease in the level of support."
"The user interface could be improved in Aruba Wireless. This would make the setup easier."
"I believe that Aruba's support could be improved."
"The Return Material Authorization procedure is time-consuming and needs improvement."
"Currently, the stability of the code is the basic underlying problem for us. They had an 8.6 release that came out two weeks ago, but we had to migrate twice because the code wasn't stable. We can't get things to work the same way. Version 8 was a big change for them. They made a change so that it is forced to be a managed hierarchical system. It means that you make changes at the top, and it pushes them downstream. There are a lot of problems with the 8.6 version code. I ran into four bugs in one week and was informed that we should just move onto the next one because all of those fixes have taken place. The feedback loop for fixes is not always really relayed back to you. I don't have a lot of strong things to say about version 8.6. When we had version 6, the controller was pretty much rock solid. We had no problems. We made a heavy investment to migrate a lot of stuff to take advantage of things like WPA3, Wi-Fi 6, and all that kind of stuff, and we haven't been able to turn those features on because we are not confident that they are going to work just yet. So, right now, we're still very much stumbling through the version 8.6 code and just trying to make sure that it is safe before we turn on some of those features. In terms of the marketplace, they are one of the top three leaders. In some respects, one of the things that they focus on is wireless. Therefore, there are some things that should be beyond reproach, as far as I'm concerned. In terms of the stability of the code, there are always going to be bugs, but the core stability of the code needs to be there. When it is not stable, that's a real problem for me because you lose a lot of confidence in the products."
"Better integration with equipment from other vendors would ease the deployment process in some cases."
"We would like the solution to work on the pricing of the solution. It would be ideal if it could bring the overall costs down."
"In the next release, I would like to see a third-party high tech center to connect multiple users to a particular network."
"We would like to see Wi-Fi 6 support for devices sold in the Middle East."
"The solution’s pricing could be improved."
"Its licensing can be better."
"There needs to be some work done on security because, with time, some viruses may emerge that one may not know about."
"The only concern is when the license has expired and it will no longer function, the entire network goes down, without any notification, or warning."
"Integration with the corporate LAN where Catalyst products are installed is a major challenge."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is ranked 4th in Wireless LAN with 115 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "The portal for centralized management and virtual controller for APs are very valuable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN writes "Offers good mobility, stability and scalability ". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Huawei Wireless and Mist AI and Cloud, whereas Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless, Mist AI and Cloud, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN 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.
Pricing is different based on region; it depends on Aruba's and Cisco's strategy in the region. You must contact the respective partners to get an accurate price for comparison.
That being said, in MENA where I live, as of a few months ago (21H1), Aruba pricing was cheaper than Cisco.
Aruba licensing for the AP's is much cheaper compared to Meraki.
You can get a 1/3/5-year cloud license per AP.