We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless based on our users’ reviews in five categories. After reading all of the collected data, you can find our conclusion below.
Comparison Results: When comparing Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless, it is evident that Cisco Wireless is the more popular choice. While both have great features, users of Cisco Wireless 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. Users do feel that it is an expensive solution, however.
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"Aruba is easier than Juniper."
"The portal has been very helpful for us."
"The solution is stable."
"The product improved overall scalability and simplicity in configuring and replacing. The use of an Aruba Controller to configure multiple APs was game-changing."
"If we really want to know where a specific user is connected, it gives us the ability to see that and how that user is actually receiving. We can know the speed and their IP, their MAC address and, most of the time, how much bandwidth they're using per day."
"Overall, it's a very strong solution."
"What I like most about Aruba Wireless is its stability, functionality, and performance."
"It has improved overall IT efficiency across the board."
"Cisco Wireless gave us the ability to deploy and seamlessly manage wireless devices at our corporate office and remote locations."
"Its stability is most valuable."
"The stability is great. It's very reliable."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the Cisco CleanAir and Cisco RRM."
"The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software."
"Some of the features I find valuable are the FlexConnect and overall it is a good global solution."
"The product enables mobility and centralized control."
"It is a very stable solution."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"The solution is expensive."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"We have had issues with the availability of the equipment."
"They should have more support for implementing Aruba Wireless in Smart Cities and outdoor applications."
"The certification for licensing could be better."
"Additional detailed reporting for client traffic would be a great addition."
"Making the setup more simple is an area for improvement in Aruba Wireless. Security-wise, this solution also needs work."
"The Return Material Authorization procedure is time-consuming and needs improvement."
"The user interface could be improved in Aruba Wireless. This would make the setup easier."
"The speed could be better. I heard that Aruba is trying to shape the speed inside the wireless controller, but that has not been adopted yet. If they put some kind of mechanism inside the wireless controller for the speed such that, "Okay, this many users will have 20 by 20 - 20 in the upload, 20 in the download. Just this many users. And this many users will have that type of speed." I think it would be very good if they actually bring that functionality inside the wireless controller."
"The configuration interface could be easier. They should make roaming easier and should fix it so that when you cross a building you can keep the signal."
"The media stream and Mojo settings are not sufficiently supported."
"The reporting of the product could be improved. When I needed to troubleshoot, I couldn't get sufficient information from the controller."
"The web interface for Cisco controllers could be better. It could be more user-friendly. Sometimes I have to remember how to access some functionalities or how to enable or execute some functions. If it were more user-friendly it would save time."
"The solution could be more stable."
"We've recently had hardware issues which have caused us some problems."
"Sometimes our customers do not get proper IP addresses from the DHCP pool."
"The price of Cisco Wireless could be lower."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 43 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 20 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "Simple to install, easy to use, and cost-effective". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Easy to deploy with a user-friendly GUI, but can be expensive". 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.