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.
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"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."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"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."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"I have not experienced any bugs, software, or hardware issues with Aruba."
"The initial setup is straightforward. Configure one IAP and all the rest self-configure to that one."
"It's been running for the past three years with no default configuration."
"The product has been pretty stable...The product is scalable."
"The most valuable feature is the fact that it can work with many devices. It supports everything that we need it to."
"I like the analytics feature."
"Its manageability of APs is the most valuable feature: ease of adding APs and the ability to configure the APs on the fly. Also, their support engineers are great to work with."
"What I like best about Aruba Wireless is that it doesn't need a controller. The product also has a GUI that's easy to navigate."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless are security and the ability to manage everything easily. Other solutions, such as Aruba are not as simple."
"The support offered by Cisco is excellent. They are very responsive and knowledgeable."
"We are using Cisco access point 2802, and they are very reliable."
"The LAN network conductivity is good."
"I like many of the features that Cisco Wireless has to offer."
"Security is an important feature for my customers, and I am able to offer this to them with our Cisco products."
"Some of the features I find valuable are the FlexConnect and overall it is a good global solution."
"There are a lot of valuable features and functions. One example is CleanAir to detect and troubleshoot interference issues. Another is RX-SOP to optimize roaming."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The pricing should be made cheaper."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"The price could be better."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The solution is expensive."
"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."
"Not cost-effective."
"Lacks a heat map analysis and a cloud-based wireless controller."
"The pricing could always be better."
"The console is difficult to use. The firewall settings could be improved."
"One area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is its dashboard or interface because in some cases, it's not as easy to use as it should be, but overall, it's okay. Pricing for the product is also on the higher side. Another area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is technical support because it's hard to reach when issues arise and the speed of answer could be faster. Other areas for improvement in the product include integration and configuration."
"Aruba needs to be more competitive with newer products. Their legacy makes that more difficult for them."
"The stability and management could be improved."
"The solution could be cheaper and have a better web interface."
"It's expensive."
"The GUI could be made more user-friendly. There should also be a dashboard where it can showcase how many end-users are connected to a particular access point."
"There is room for improvement regarding HA issues and Radius integration."
"The solution's pricing should be improved."
"When you integrate a network access control with authentication with an ISE engine it's really complicated to put in place."
"It was expensive. Considering the challenges faced in third-world countries like Pakistan or India, cheaper solutions are preferred."
"The software quality could be improved, in particular for the new Cisco Aironet Series 2800/3800 Access Point which is pretty Linux-based."
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 146 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.