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.
"The most valuable feature of the solution is Marvis, the AI-driven network management system."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"The artificial intelligence feature is very good."
"The simplicity is great."
"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."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba Wireless is application monitoring."
"It has improved overall IT efficiency across the board."
"The technical support is very good."
"The product improved overall scalability and simplicity in configuring and replacing. The use of an Aruba Controller to configure multiple APs was game-changing."
"We were able to increase capacity very easily."
"The web-based GUI is much simpler to use than similar products by Cisco."
"We appreciate the integration options that are available."
"Aruba Wireless does not have too many distinguishing feature sets. However, tunneling is more flexible in this solution than other solutions, such as Ruckus."
"This product has a long life and you don't have any issues with it."
"One of the main advantages of Cisco Wireless is its DNAT compatibility. When we have dynamic segmentation, or the DNAT enabled on the LAN, Cisco Access Point integrates with the DNAT architecture. Aruba Switches cannot integrate with the Cisco DNAT architecture."
"I find this solution easy to configure and use."
"All the features of the solution are good. The enterprise environment seamlessly integrates with Cisco Wireless. I have contacted customer service and support about licenses and other technical aspects. I have not faced any issues. The solution is good for our environment."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"Creating policies is simple."
"Cisco Wireless is highly stable."
"The integration is great."
"The price could be better."
"The solution is expensive."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"I need a bit more time with it before criticizing the features."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"We have an issue with the integration of Aruba Wireless with our LDAP servers."
"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."
"I would like to see a faster web interface in the controller and more troubleshooting tools, including real-time troubleshooting tools."
"The solution's GUI for configuration could be better."
"They should have more support for implementing Aruba Wireless in Smart Cities and outdoor applications."
"The solution could be more user-friendly."
"I would have liked to see more manufacturer driven events and outings to drive brand recognition and familiarity."
"There needs to be better visibility on the day-to-day monitoring."
"The bind configuration between a physical port and an IP address is missing."
"Most definitely the cost."
"Sometimes I've seen some issues come up with the interference. That's an issue users face at times. It becomes very complex when you have a lot of wireless interference in the area, or in your office. It's because of the environment of Cisco. Maybe, in the future, they can work on this area, and fix this issue."
"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 should introduce natural language troubleshooting processes. It will identify possible problems or errors due to the symptoms."
"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."
"Cisco Wireless is expensive."
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.