Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless are industry leaders, offering robust solutions for building and managing wireless networks. Users prefer the robust stability of Cisco Wireless after a longer setup process, while Aruba Wireless offers quicker deployment with seamless integration and strong security features. Cisco Wireless excels in performance and customization options, but needs improvement in range and connectivity. Consider your existing network infrastructure. If you heavily rely on Cisco products, Cisco Wireless might offer smoother integration.
The summary above is based on 64 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Wireless and Aruba Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"The simplicity is great."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"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."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"It's a very stable system."
"This is the second time I've implemented and installed this solution and I think it is outstanding. The support is excellent and so is the hardware. We don't need much support because nothing really goes wrong."
"The biggest selling point was the ability to create two different SSIDs to control public versus private wireless networks."
"HA: Apps failover without reboot."
"I like the analytics feature."
"Price is one of the most important factors. We have a solution that's reasonably cost-effective when balanced against all the areas we need to cover."
"Initial setup was very straightforward. We set up the switches and APs, then took it from there. "
"It has an aesthetically pleasing GUI for configuration."
"Cisco Wireless always has the latest technology that supports WiFi 5 and 6."
"Compared to other solutions, captive guest network is one of the best isolation and tunneling."
"This solution is highly stable. We have only had one issue in seven years."
"Good connectivity and easy to configure."
"The feature that I have found most valuable is its durability because we can rely on this solution. It is also easy to configure. Lastly, if something happens, we get good support from Cisco."
"Cisco Wireless is mostly stable with a low downrate and the signal rate is good. It is also easy to use."
"It is a reliable and robust solution. Access and Mobility Groups are useful. We don't use anything very fancy."
"The tool is mainly improving our productivity."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The solution is expensive."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"I believe it would benefit from more reporting, other than just a dashboard. It needs some type of report builder so you can have PDFs to show upper management what is going on in the wireless network."
"Better integration with equipment from other vendors would ease the deployment process in some cases."
"The user interface could be improved in Aruba Wireless. This would make the setup easier."
"The Return Material Authorization procedure is time-consuming and needs improvement."
"I would like to be able to customize Captive Portals."
"An area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is creating a DMZ. Without Aruba ClearPass, you need to allow guess access directly via the internet, which means you need to implement the security in between, so this is what I'd like Aruba to improve in the product."
"An area of this product that could use improvement would be the troubleshooting. At times I had to engage Aruba Support which ran some pretty complicated troubleshooting commands. I would not have been able to do with existing CLI documentation."
"There are some issues we occasionally have. However, they are easily remedied."
"It would be better if some utility lets us know the best place to install the system. Every time we install it, we have to change it, and we have to add more access points. This is a problem we have all the time. It would be better if it integrated seamlessly with products from other vendors. It'll also help if they included a device diagnostics feature in the next release."
"The biggest reason why we could no longer continue with Cisco Wireless was because of the high cost to upgrade everything. It was disappointing that Cisco treated us as just another big company, and did not offer any leeway on their pricing given that we are an educational institute. And although the system we had in place from Cisco Wireless was good enough over the last ten years, it started to show its age when pushed to its limit during the pandemic."
"The flexibility on the controllers isn't that great."
"Cisco won't work with any other vendors. That is a significant problem with Cisco."
"Its licensing model and cost should be improved."
"The price of Cisco Wireless could be lower."
"The security must be improved."
"The pricing could be reduced."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 145 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Cisco Wireless 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 Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Huawei Wireless and Mist AI and Cloud, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Mist AI and Cloud and Omada Access Points. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco 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.
On the most basic level, Cisco Wireless can offer a rather straightforward initial setup. In the span of about three hours, the basic framework can be set up. Step-by-step instructions are available to ease the deployment of the Cisco wireless network. A small business will now be able to make use of this wireless product without being worried about having to make a massive investment of either time or resources. This peace of mind extends to the actual maintenance of the product as well. Cisco wireless’s network does not require very much in the way of maintenance. It does require occasional upgrades to keep it running smoothly, but other than that, a team tasked with maintaining it has very little to worry about. Organizations of all sizes will be able to benefit from both of these aspects of Cisco wireless’s design.
Cisco wireless provides a very robust service that will continue to run over long periods of time and under heavy usage. Furthermore, the teams that are responsible for assisting users and resolving any potential issues that may arise are highly professional. These are two additional features that make Cisco wireless a valuable product. The wireless service is capable of running for years without any real need for replacements to be made to the hardware.
Although no system is perfect, Cisco’s Wireless network shows that products can still be made to last. Long spans of time can pass without issues arising. When they do, Cisco’s technical support team is well-equipped to help handle it. They respond quickly to inquiries and they are extremely knowledgeable. They bring the kind of professionalism that one would hope to have in a product’s support team.
Aruba Wireless can support many devices and provide the features that one would expect for this type of product. It is relatively cheap when compared to other products like Cisco Wireless. For that relatively cheap price, Aruba offers hardware whose performance can match anything offered by its competitors. It advertises what it can do and follows through with its promises. It is also very easy to configure. However, they do not guide users in different industries through the best practices that they should be employing when using Aruba Wireless.
Conclusion
Cisco Wireless offers an effective service. In terms of cost it is more expensive than Aruba Wireless. They both have a lot to offer. The price tag might just be the deciding factor.
Aruba is our choice for our WIFI solution as Aruba has a lot of features that can do the same with Meraki.
Aruba is saving costs vs Meraki in a long time operation.