We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiExtender and Ruckus Wireless WAN based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Management can be carried out from a central point."
"For me, the best feature of Fortinet FortiExtender is its integration with an external solution such as a 5G LTE broadband modem, wired modem, and cellular network. I also like that the product can be integrated into one device or a unified device, and that is one of its best features because it allows you to manage and centralize the control of every device."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"The strongest point for Ruckus has always been the radio hardware."
"The actual wireless access points themselves are very powerful."
"The solution is easy to use and offers good management for wireless."
"Radio management is a valuable feature of the solution."
"The technical features are very good and it's very useful if you need a wireless solution."
"Ruckus Wireless WAN is an easy-to-use solution."
"The ratio of highest quality to value is the most valuable."
"There are numerous features, but what I like about Ruckus is that they have a good coverage range due to their BeamFlex technique."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"The support could be faster and more responsive."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"Integration with AirMagnet, the design software, would be good because it takes the layout of a building and positions the access points accordingly, based on the areas and the construction materials."
"In Cisco, there is a configuration where it automatically switches from the 2.4 GHz to 5.2 GHz frequency. But with Ruckus, usually, we need to manually define whether we want to use the 2.4 GHz or 5.2 GHz."
"We have one sole distributor here in our region. To have multiple distributors here would be very helpful to improve the supply chain."
"Of course, we'd always like it to be cheaper, but that's for every product."
"Pricing could be improved in Ruckus Wireless WAN because obviously, everybody wants things to become cheaper. Another room for improvement in the product is from a delivery perspective, particularly the heavy delivery delays because of the chip shortage that a lot of manufacturers have to deal with. The chip shortage is not coming to an end, but Ruckus Networks has to make a plan because the ETA has slipped out from the average of three months on switches to fourteen months, which is very, very rough on the industry at the moment. Ruckus Wireless WAN could lose business to Chinese competitors, for example, HTC has a good wireless solution that I haven't tested yet, other than on POC, and it works great. I haven't yet experienced the HTC wireless solution in large deployments, so you never know how it's going to go, but HTC has managed to circumvent the chip shortage, so the ETA provided by HTC is much more preferred than the ETAs provided by Ruckus Networks, Cisco, and Aruba products."
"Pricing is an area for improvement. The devices are relatively expensive."
"They could include a firewall feature in the next release but even there it's not really necessary"
"I believe there is room for improvement in the price structure."
Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews. Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN, whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless and Cambium Networks Wireless WAN. See our Fortinet FortiExtender vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.
