We performed a comparison between Cisco Wireless and Fortinet FortiWLM based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The solution is stable."
"Juniper Mist offers valuable features like comprehensive network insight, granular policy control, fast device setup, strong security, and efficient SSL traffic management."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"The solution is highly scalable."
"Some of the features I find valuable are the FlexConnect and overall it is a good global solution."
"It gave us the ability to view wireless traffic, unwanted devices on the network, and how they affected overall network performance."
"Setting up Cisco Wireless is pretty straightforward. It takes about an hour or two, and we can handle it in-house. To deploy one project, it takes two to three for a single controller."
"It's a reliable solution."
"It's very easy to configure the access points."
"I'm very satisfied with Cisco's technical support."
"The stability is great. It's very reliable."
"The most valuable features are central management and the many other features available."
"The Fortinet FortiWLM system can be controlled through the cloud controller, which is convenient when the solution is not installed in our environment, as it allows us to manage the entire WiFi or access points and provides more adaptability."
"The security is a valuable feature."
"The most valuable features of this solution are its speed, reliability, and integration with the firewall."
"I use Fortinet FortiWLM for wireless communication and the internet."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is the management."
"Fortinet FortiWLM is good for tracking assets, monitoring, and overall management."
"Although there are a few steps, the initial setup is pretty straightforward."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) could improve if the MIST platform had a built-in master key. This would be an advantage."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
"Juniper Wireless AP can improve by continually improving its reporting and integration with other systems."
"Improving third-party integration is key for Juniper Mist's next release."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"They should introduce zero interference capabilities."
"The stability could improve, there are some issues. We were told the version of the software we are using on all of the controllers is best for Cisco IOS, but we might need to update our software, this might fix the stability issues we are experiencing."
"There is a problem with the controller. When we have to restart the controller, it does not show the time. We have to manually configure the time when we restart it. I have read about this issue, to get some information, and all answers are about having to connect it with a time server, which is very difficult."
"The installation is not too difficult but the solution could improve by making the configuration easier."
"When you integrate a network access control with authentication with an ISE engine it's really complicated to put in place."
"There are some areas of improvement needed in roaming and streaming."
"It would be great if it is compatible with other products."
"The reporting tool in Cisco Wireless could improve. If I am trying to receive information about a client or user, it's cumbersome to retrieve the information on the controller system. If I'm trying to find out where a client's been, it's cumbersome. You need another tool for Historical logs, but it should be all in one."
"The guest management features need to be improved by adding automation."
"I have used Cisco previously and I don't see any specific differences from Fortinet FortiWLM or other vendors."
"Documentation could be improved."
"Areas for improvement would be the compatibility with Apple products and cross-platform integration."
"The initial setup is complex and has room for improvement."
"One of the main features that I see as lacking in any of the Fortinet products is the reporting. If you want to have proper, end-to-end reporting, you must purchase the FortiAnalyzer... If Fortinet could offer some better, built-in reporting, that would be a point of improvement."
"The interface could certainly do with some improvement. We have other customers with WiFi networks, and they always use Ubiquiti. With Ubiquiti, it's a much better user interface, and it is much easier to configure."
"The solution should improve user capacity."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 147 reviews while Fortinet FortiWLM is ranked 16th in Wireless LAN with 22 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Fortinet FortiWLM is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Allows us to deploy a wide range of wireless products with stable WiFi". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Fortinet FortiWLM writes "Impressive manufacturing quality, highly durable, and very easy to deploy". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Omada Access Points, whereas Fortinet FortiWLM is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti Wireless and Omada Access Points. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Fortinet FortiWLM 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.
All are good selections, and this question is difficult to answer without knowing your throughput requirements, as each vendor has multiple models within there series.
Personally I recommend looking at Arista Networks’ cognitive Wifi, where controllers are a thing of the past.
Ruckus virtual smart zone will be your best bet allowing up to 300k connected devices and 30k access points. furthermore, Ruckus has time and again proven best in speed, throughput in high density environments by independent studies. I have over a decade of working with this product and none of the other competitors can beat the layer 1 connectivity of Ruckus WiFi
Hi,
Every one of the mentioned solutions is good but you need to check the needs which are security since the firms you are working with need protection and tracking of data. For this reason, I recommend:
- if you have FortiGate installed then go for Fortinet Wireless since they can be integrated with the Fortigate without buying a controller and they work perfectly together and you will get the advantage of applying rules to the client himself whether mobile or computer, easily managed & monitored, more visibility over your network and incident notifications.
If the above doesn't apply then you can go with the best one that fits your budget and security needs which for me doesn't fall on the mentioned solution but to go with ARUBA Instant Access Wireless Solution and the reasons are as such:
- Cisco is too much expensive and you got to pay smart support with some complexity in configuration and you need to buy a controller
- Ruckus is good but when you want to have the security you need to buy a controller with licenses and it won't give you the security needed since it is just a wireless solution
- Huawei is not a stable company since it had many ups and downs and they can reach with you to have all the solutions nearly free so that you install their brand.
Whereas Aruba you don't need a controller in the Instant access points and you will get the minimum security with radius integration and what is important a lifetime warranty on the access points.
In addition, if the number of access points increased and you want more detailed management and more advanced configurations, you can buy a controller either on-premises or on-cloud with Aruba.
The above information is based on my experience with all the solutions and their POC.
If you need any more details and consultancy, kindly feel free to contact me.
Regards.
Hi Imad,
Thanks for your input. Do you have any POC data for Cisco and Aruba?
Thanks in advance
Boa tarde
As soluções cada solução que você indicou tem pormenores que podem impactar tanto no funcionamento quanto em caso de disaster recovery.
Fortinet: Possui bons access points, aliado às funcionalidades de segurança do próprio UTM, porém será mais um serviço para o appliance gerenciar, e dependendo do que está rodando nele, corre-se o risco de degradar a performance da funcionalidade principal "segurança", por que tambem está gerenciando uma rede wireless, além do fato se houver alguma pane no appliance Fortinet, tanto os itens de segurança quanto a rede wireless irão ficar indisponível. Dê a Cézar o que é de Cézar, deixe a fortinet focada em segurança, que é o que ela faz de melhor.
Ruckus: Excelentes Access points, confiáveis e com alta performance, possui no mínimo 4 opções de gerência, sendo, controlerless Unleashed, appliance virtual, appliance hardware e cloud, ambas as opções não trará prejuizo à performance da rede wireless, porque não há tunelamento de dados para elas, além de possuir várias funções de segurança inerentes à rede wireless. licenças são perpétuas.
Cisco: Excelente access points, porém solução muito cara para aquisição e renovação.
Huawei: Pelo que conheço, tem bons access points, e controladoras virtuais e appliance físico, mas conheço poucas redes com esta solução.
É lógico que uma tem um recurso extra a mais do que a outra, mas considero mera perfumaria, pois o básico para uma rede wireless segura todas atendem.
Eu já atendi a mais de 40 universidades federais no Brasil, todas com Ruckus, e não há reclamação da solução.
Como recomendação pessoal, vá de Ruckus.
Hi,
It is all dependent on the size of the controllers in question. Though I would suggest getting a cloud base technology so you are limited by any controller and have much better redundancy. Take a look at Arista Cognitive Wireless