We performed a comparison between Cisco 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 devices are all of good quality."
"The ease of management is the solution's most valuable feature."
"Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten."
"It just gives you the ability to use it around the office without being tied up to an actual physical connection."
"We found the initial setup to be straightforward."
"The access points and controllers are good."
"We have found that the product scales well."
"Our most valuable feature involves the 802.11ac, which operates at a very high level and has updated technology."
"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."
"The setup is quite simple."
"It has a user-friendly interface."
"I like the fact that you can set it up like a wireless connection. Previously, we used to connect from one SSID to another. When we started using Ubiquiti, everyone was so happy because even if they moved from one place or another, say from the pantry to a meeting room, they didn't need to connect manually to another SSID. This is one of the features that I really like about it. It is doing a great job. It offers a free controller that you can use to see if the devices are connected or not and if they are up or down."
"I like that it's cheaper and inexpensive. It's also easy to use."
"Very simple, very basic setup for Ubiquiti Wireless. Its performance in a home or small business setting with fewer access points is fantastic."
"Ubiquiti wireless proves especially helpful in scenarios requiring mobility."
"It is a highly scalable platform."
"The reporting feature needs improvement, especially adding information with regards to availability uptime."
"Cisco Wireless WAN would be improved with the ability to monitor new usernames, product registrations, and flow traffic."
"The setup of Cisco Wireless WAN needs an expert. You need someone with experience to be able to work with Cisco Wireless solutions. It took approximately one to two weeks to implement the solution."
"Technical support could be more helpful."
"It is expensive."
"Cisco Firewall cannot recognize some applications and that makes dealing with policies difficult. Even when we whitelist, it does not work well."
"The firewall integration is not great."
"In terms of improvement, there is always something that could be enhanced. For example, we can't change wireless channels in Cisco Meraki due to a recent standard update."
"The technical support is less than stellar."
"Difficult to see error logs and locate the problem."
"Tech support is mostly remote and could be better."
"Sometimes we have some micro breaks we do not know what causes them."
"The strength of the routers could be improved. When it comes to serious routing, the solution doesn't measure up to the big guys like Juniper and Cisco, but we don't expect it to."
"o if you are setting up any other third party product or any other different product, it sometimes can be a bit difficult. With Ubiquiti, you need to set up because you can adopt the product and that's it, where if it's not a Ubiquiti product it can sometimes be a difficult setup."
"They should have more VLAN features and a designing tool like a link planer."
"This might not be the best solution for a very large organization."
Cisco Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 61 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Cisco Wireless WAN is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless WAN writes "Widely available and has a straightforward setup". 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 ". Cisco Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN and Aruba Wireless. See our Cisco 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.