We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless 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 installation process was easy."
"I like the way that it integrates with the ClearPass security system on-site."
"The solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great."
"In the event of a controller appliance failure or downtime, the system seamlessly transitions control to any access point acting as a backup controller."
"They offer per-user tunneling to a variety of endpoints."
"Aruba makes use of "Direct Tunnel" as its best security feature."
"The solution is easy to use."
"I believe their Adaptive Radio Management (ARM) in its current form provides the best automated management of transmit power and channel. It does a really good job of managing proper design and wireless environment."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up."
"The most valuable aspect of Ubiquiti is the ease of setup. It's easy to set up, secure, and use. It works on an adoption basis. I can pull the system up, design a network, and pull 20 different Ubiquiti units into it."
"I like that it's cheaper and inexpensive. It's also easy to use."
"It's very easy to use. The hardware is very easy to use, compared to Microsoft. Microsoft is more complicated. It has software that is okay if you are familiar with it. In my opinion, Ubiquiti hardware is more heavy duty then Microsoft."
"Ubiquiti is intuitive. The management interface is user-friendly. You can easily make changes and do the things that need to be done."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"The range is usually pretty good, which is the most important thing to use because more or less, all wireless access points are the same."
"One of the nice features is the backup version control."
"They have to work on their Aruba Central cloud platform. There are still some glitches such as not showing proper user details. When we removed the AP from the Aruba Central cloud, it showed up as being connected to Aruba Central. They need to fix these issues."
"The solution would be improved with a better interface."
"The only issues are the configuration problems that impact the stability of the solution."
"The customization options could be improved."
"We'd like to have a bit more artificial intelligence incorporated into existing products."
"There is room for improvement in the pricing, it's quite a premium."
"Deployment can take some time if you haven't planned well."
"It works. We don't look at it any deeper than that and don't find any features ar missing."
"There is really nothing wrong with the product but there are ways the utility and features can be expanded to meet future demands."
"I would like a better explanation or better documentation on how to use the onboard spectrum analyzer."
"They should make more advanced features for the power users. I am a technician and I am functional, but I do need some features that I find only in Microsoft."
"We tried to create an access point with built-in voice and sound that we could use in schools, for example. We tried to create something that could play sounds or messages out of the access points. We wanted to, for example, use it as a school bell instead of using other equipment. It didn't work very well. It turns out when you connect to the Ubiquiti Wireless access point, it's not possible to send simple messages (like what is going on in the canteen, or some news update for the school, etc.). We had to use the on-premises version, as the cloud version wouldn't allow for this."
"They have access points that are in the firewalls, and I believe the firewalls could be significantly better. They use the USG firewall, which I believe is a poor device. VPNs for example, it is really bad, it is difficult to configure, and I don't like them at all."
"Better security is important because we need to have some degree of control over who is connected and how we can restrict the level of connectivity."
"The range and maybe the quality of the signal can be improved. I had a feeling that the range wasn't long enough. Unfortunately, beyond a certain range, the signal was too weak. If I'm not mistaken, it must have been something like 100 or more than 100 meters, but I'm not sure. So, one improvement I wish for this equipment is to have a longer range, but that could mainly be due to the model we're using."
"The solution has very good product lines. However, it feels like some models overlap. For example, a new model is announced after three months, and another new model is announced shortly after. So, the release cycle feels too short, and some features overlap. Overall, the products are very good and reliable."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 47 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. 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 Ubiquiti Wireless writes "It's cheap and easy to use but isn't suitable for large deployments or complex use cases ". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Aruba Wireless and Cisco Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless 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.