We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender 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."The product keeps up with leading-edge technology so we have dependability and scalability."
"An engineer with enough experience can tune the network however they want. It's crucial. It's good to customize our information security how we like it and configure the solution to achieve the level of stability we need."
"The installation process was easy."
"The solution is overall a great product. The stability is one of the best aspects of it. It's also useful in helping control multiple access points. You don't need to have a physical controller like other brands."
"It integrates with the Aruba portfolio very easily, and it's a vendor-agnostic solution, and that's brilliant."
"The most valuable features are price, quality, and performance."
"We don't know this product very well yet, but what we have used so far and what we like are user control, bandwidth, and access."
"Aruba is a very stable system."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"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 solution is extremely user-friendly."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"Device integration has room for improvement in Aruba Networks Wireless WAN."
"The internet signal and the connection can be better."
"From the commercial-side the pricing side is fine but in other aspects, it could be lowered."
"The issue is that we are unable to update it because we lack the necessary permissions. We set up the website, but we don't have permission to download the software."
"Aruba Networks Wireless WAN could improve the solution availability. The selection of mounting hardware for the various radios is limited and poor. Often, you have to create and manufacture your own mounting hardware in certain situations."
"Aruba's technical support has room for improvement."
"The only issues are the configuration problems that impact the stability of the solution."
"Right now, the integration between the support that you are getting from Hewlett-Packard, which is the parent company, and Aruba, they're not meshing together."
"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."
"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."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 47 reviews while Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN writes "It's reliable, cost-effective, and easy to troubleshoot". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Ubiquiti Wireless, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Fortinet FortiExtender 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.