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.
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The simplicity is great."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"Aruba is an industry leader. The hardware is on par, and its performance is also on par with anybody else. The Aruba brand really only focuses on wireless, so they're not competing their R&D for switching data center products and cloud security. They're really focused on that and their underlying key pieces. They provide a role-based authentication that is native to the controller. A lot of other systems don't do that. They won't provide you the ability to basically have everybody join the network, regardless of whether or not they share the same network space, the SSID, or the wireless LAN. You can segment it down to a specific user role based on any kind of attributes that you like. That's their differentiator. If you need per user, per device, or per port segmentation, you can get that with Aruba. There isn't another vendor who does it."
"The initial setup was very simple."
"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."
"It offers an easy initial setup."
"Although there are other solutions available and some with a lower initial cost, they don't offer the same level of integration with IoT as this solution without having to add additional hardware, which ends up costing more."
"Aruba Wireless offers a good user experience."
"The access points support a high number of connected clients."
"The stability is the best. It's very reliable."
"It is a reliable and robust solution. Access and Mobility Groups are useful. We don't use anything very fancy."
"The most valuable features for network security with Cisco Wireless were the policy enforcement capabilities."
"From my experience, I have found Cisco Wireless to be scalable."
"Good manageability, and stability."
"The solution offers central management, reliability, and signal, ensures the bandwidth, and segregates the network. It also maintains the authentication process in the compass solution, which is good regarding multiple software."
"Before COVID, the emphasis was primarily on wireless connectivity in specific areas like conference rooms. However, with the shift to remote work and increased mobility, coverage areas needed to be expanded to accommodate users throughout the entire location. We are beginning to expand our infrastructure."
"The initial setup was quite easy. We have a very good relationship with our integrator and our integrator has a good relationship with Cisco. The integrator that installs Cisco is quite knowledgeable about the technology. They are trained and have a good relationship with their tech. We cannot be experts in each domain and we have to be supported by an integrator."
"The most valuable features of this solution are the Cisco CleanAir and Cisco RRM."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"The price could be better."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"The latest design of their APs removes the console port and requires purchasing an expensive proprietary cable just to access the console."
"Every month Aruba has new firmware. I don't know if it's good or bad but it's not good in terms of production. We can't upgrade our firmware every month, especially an enterprise company, because if we upgrade our firmware based on the latest firmware that Aruba has, that firmware is not stable. They're not 100 percent sure about it."
"We would like to declare a specific number of devices that an employee or a user can use to access their Wi-Fi."
"The console is difficult to use. The firewall settings could be improved."
"They should simplify the configuration flow."
"Access point mounting options could be better."
"Some additional reporting features about the clients would be nice when not combined with the AirWave management package."
"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."
"The installation is very tiring and painful, the process could be easier."
"I would like to see less dependency on other products such as ISE and Prime for certain implementations."
"The software quality could be improved, in particular for the new Cisco Aironet Series 2800/3800 Access Point which is pretty Linux-based."
"We use a Cisco product called Room Kit for meetings. It would be nice if Cisco could improve that. I would also like a cloud solution."
"The main problem that traditional solutions like this one have is that you need to buy packages to deliver a similar solution as a Meraki one."
"Improvements can be made to the telemetry. The licensing gets in the way here. It makes it impossible to record the different flows across the wireless network."
"The solution doesn't have much coverage area."
"The new licensing model isn't as good as what they had before."
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 143 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.