We compared Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Cisco Wireless is praised for its robust network connectivity, seamless roaming capabilities, and excellent security measures, while Huawei Wireless stands out for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, and reliable signal strength. Cisco Wireless receives positive feedback on customer service and support, setup cost, and licensing, leading to a highly satisfactory return on investment. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless users appreciate its sleek design, user-friendly interface, and long battery life, along with efficient customer service and competitive pricing. Areas for improvement for Cisco Wireless include signal strength, security features, and user interface, while Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength and device compatibility.
Features: Cisco Wireless is valued for robust network connectivity, seamless roaming, reliable performance, excellent security measures, and user-friendly management interfaces. Huawei Wireless is praised for its strong connectivity, efficient performance, user-friendly interface, and reliable signal strength.
Pricing and ROI: The setup cost for Cisco Wireless is reported to be manageable and user-friendly, while Huawei Wireless is acknowledged to have a straightforward and hassle-free setup cost. Additionally, users mention the flexibility and options provided by Cisco's licensing, while Huawei's licensing is easily obtained and offers usage flexibility., According to user feedback, the ROI from Cisco Wireless has been highly satisfactory, while Huawei Wireless has contributed positively to our return on investment.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Wireless may need improvements in signal strength, security features, user interface, reliability, and connection speed. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless could benefit from enhancements in signal strength, compatibility, user interface, and durability.
Deployment and customer support: The reviews for Cisco Wireless mention varying timeframes for deployment and setup, ranging from three months for deployment and an additional week for setup to a week for both deployment and setup. On the other hand, Huawei Wireless reviews also mention varying durations, with some users spending three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others spending a week each on both deployment and setup, suggesting that these terms may refer to the same period., Cisco Wireless products have received high praise for their customer service and support. Users have expressed satisfaction with prompt and helpful assistance, efficient and responsive support staff, and an overall positive experience. Similarly, Huawei Wireless products have also been highly praised for their customer service and support. Users appreciate the prompt and helpful resolution of issues, the expertise and knowledge of the support team, and the professional and efficient customer service experience.
The summary above is based on 66 interviews we conducted recently with Cisco Wireless and Huawei Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Mist is the Virtual Network Assistant, powered by artificial intelligence."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"It provides private network access, helping us protect our company’s devices."
"The most valuable feature of Juniper Wireless Access Points (AP Series) is the ability to troubleshoot ports on the network. Additionally, when there is an update on the APs they are able to reboot quickly reducing downtime. Other solutions have a longer downtime when updates are done."
"The solution is very secure."
"The solution is pretty generic and easy to use."
"Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"The LAN network conductivity is good."
"One of the most valuable features we have found is security"
"Overall, Cisco was stable and worked well for all our needs until we started having more and more students and teachers using YouTube and Zoom — what with classes being isolated and everything — which put a lot of strain on our Wi-Fi network."
"Security is an important feature for my customers, and I am able to offer this to them with our Cisco products."
"The stability is great. It's very reliable."
"The product’s stability is great."
"The ability to make different types of networks, such as land networks, is the most valuable part of the solution."
"We were able to utilize the elements of the core and provide a solution to our customers similar to that of Cisco Meraki."
"We've found the solution to be quite stable."
"The solution offers very good value for money."
"It provides high-speed network connections."
"The solution has high performance and we are using Wi-Fi 6 that we have found to be the best coverage."
"Installation is easy."
"We can use an access point to broadcast multiple SSIDs, assign dynamic VLANs, and configure dynamic access control lists (ACLs)."
"The most valuable feature of the solution is its simplicity."
"It is a stable solution...It is a scalable solution."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"The price could be better."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"It would be helpful to have even stronger security features to help protect against interference from other nearby access points that aren't part of our network."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
"There is room for improvement in terms of support and installation."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"It requires a few tweaks in order to stabilize it. Its portal is complex. Cisco solutions are complex in general."
"The reporting of the product could be improved. When I needed to troubleshoot, I couldn't get sufficient information from the controller."
"In the future, it would be great if the solution had a GPS feature that could have the ability through access points to locate cell phone users inside a local wireless network, for example in a stadium."
"The GUI could be made more user-friendly. There should also be a dashboard where it can showcase how many end-users are connected to a particular access point."
"There needs to be an access point that is compact and more suitable for small and medium-sized businesses."
"Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types."
"Cisco is costlier relative to other solutions."
"Even though the tool offers a cloud-based central management option, the product needs to work on improving the security part a bit since it is an area of concern."
"Huawei Wireless is not scalable. We have had a problem with the solution because it cannot integrate with other servers as the other competitors can."
"Support could be a bit faster."
"The ongoing support and ongoing follow-up on customers is an area where the solution lacks."
"The manageability could be improved."
"While technically proficient, enhancing communication skills would greatly benefit the customer experience."
"What needs improvement in Huawei Wireless is after-sales support. I've faced many after-sales support issues, so that's the area I want Huawei to improve. Having an SLA with customers is what I'd suggest to Huawei Wireless."
"The scalability could be better."
"Improving the visibility, control offered, and cloud management would all be very helpful. Also how you can monetize the information you get from Wi-Fi controllers should be improved."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 148 reviews while Huawei Wireless is ranked 10th in Wireless LAN with 33 reviews. Cisco Wireless is rated 8.2, while Huawei Wireless is rated 8.0. 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 Huawei Wireless writes "Customizable and has many unique features, such as encryption, spatial streams, and smart antennas". Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ubiquiti WLAN and Omada Access Points, whereas Huawei Wireless is most compared with D-Link Wireless, Aruba Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Fortinet FortiAP. See our Cisco Wireless vs. Huawei Wireless 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