We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless 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."We have found that the product scales well."
"Recently, the most valuable and in-demand feature that users are enjoying is WiFi 6 support on the access points. The other good thing about Cisco Wireless LAN is how easily it provides clean access to the WiFi network."
"The devices are all of good quality."
"The most valuable features for me are the ease of operation and scalability."
"Provides good visibility and insights into what is happening."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless WAN are its security functionality. We have a lab environment and we have to provide different authentications to the users which are easy to manage. Additionally, there is a lot of useful automation embedded into the system."
"Granularity of standardization and technical controls."
"I also like that now you can add a cellular connection to the Cisco router. So, if your operator is down, you can now still have one connection in the office with the cellular module."
"It is very stable and the equipment lasts quite a long time."
"I have found the most valuable features to be the ability to use the main centralized administration process and the internet."
"The failure rate is very low on these devices - I've had them installed for five years and have only lost one out of a hundred."
"The solution is easy to use and flexible."
"Easy to set up and maintain and simple to configure."
"Ubiquiti is easier to install than Mikrotik."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a simple and useful tool that offers good performance."
"Ubiquiti is intuitive. The management interface is user-friendly. You can easily make changes and do the things that need to be done."
"If there's a problem, it's usually when Cisco pushes out updates. The users don't always push the updates to their computer, and it causes some issues. It's reliable as long as everyone is doing what they're supposed to."
"There are limitations on the SSIDs that could improve. We cannot enable two ways of authenticating users on one SSID. For a number of places, we have to provide different modes of certification for the user which requires us to create another SSID for the broadcast."
"Include more managing features within the product, rather than having to purchase them as extras."
"The solution could be more stable."
"The new platform of Cisco Wireless WAN I did not like, there weren't many features available. The online platform has more options."
"In terms of improvement, there is always something that could be enhanced. For example, we can't change wireless channels in Cisco Meraki due to a recent standard update."
"The solution could lower its pricing to make it more affordable."
"Improvements can be made in the wireless fabric."
"My company has to wait for a response from the product's support team. From an improvement perspective, the product's support team should be quicker to respond."
"Everything needs to be professionally done."
"The accessibility to technical support could be better."
"This solution should be more robust when it comes to connectivity and improve wireless technology."
"We need an official distributor in Egypt as we don't have one right now."
"The cost is on the higher side and could be lower."
"There is really nothing wrong with the product but there are ways the utility and features can be expanded to meet future demands."
"The technical support services need improvement."
Cisco Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 60 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 67 reviews. Cisco Wireless WAN is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless WAN writes "It's a reliable, user-friendly solution". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ubiquiti Wireless writes "It's cheap and easy to use but isn't suitable for large deployments or complex use cases ". Cisco Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Aruba Wireless. See our Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless 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.