We compared Ruckus Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless based on our user's reviews in several parameters.
In summary, Ruckus Wireless WAN is commended for its excellent signal strength and network stability, while Ubiquiti Wireless is praised for its reliable connections and ease of installation. Ruckus offers robust security measures, scalability, and advanced troubleshooting capabilities, while Ubiquiti is noted for its user-friendly interface and security features. Customers find Ruckus's pricing competitive and appreciate its strong ROI, while Ubiquiti is valued for its cost-effectiveness and positive impact on productivity. Critics suggest Ruckus improve network stability and management options, while Ubiquiti could focus on signal strength and reliability enhancements.
Features: Ruckus Wireless WAN stands out for its excellent signal strength and coverage, seamless connectivity, and advanced troubleshooting capabilities. On the other hand, Ubiquiti Wireless excels in its ease of installation and setup, user-friendly interface, and flexible scalability options.
Pricing and ROI: Ruckus Wireless WAN has been praised for its reasonable and competitive pricing, with minimal installation costs. Users find the licensing process flexible. On the other hand, customers consider Ubiquiti Wireless to offer good value for the cost, with straightforward setup and no additional expenses. The licensing process is described as uncomplicated and hassle-free., The ROI from Ruckus Wireless WAN was highly positive. Users praised the ease of installation and setup, as well as the scalable solution. On the other hand, Ubiquiti Wireless offers cost-effectiveness and advanced security features. Users appreciate the improved connectivity and faster speeds.
Room for Improvement: Ruckus Wireless WAN could improve network stability, reliability, management options, configuration options, troubleshooting capabilities, and customer support. Meanwhile, Ubiquiti Wireless needs enhancements in signal strength, coverage, reliability, and stability.
Deployment and customer support: User reviews of Ruckus Wireless WAN indicate varying durations for deployment, setup, and implementation. Some users spent three months on deployment and an additional week on setup, while others completed both in a week. For Ubiquiti Wireless, some users took three months for deployment and a week for setup, while others took a week for each. The context in which users use these terms should be considered., Ruckus Wireless WAN is known for its reliable support system and efficient problem resolution. In comparison, Ubiquiti Wireless excels at providing excellent customer service, with knowledgeable and patient support personnel who offer prompt and helpful assistance.
The summary above is based on 58 interviews we conducted recently with Ruckus Wireless WAN and Ubiquiti Wireless users. To access the review's full transcripts, download our report.
"The initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN is very easy."
"One of its notable advantages lies in the superior performance of its antennas and radios."
"One of the standout features is the ease of installation and commissioning, making the whole process very straightforward."
"The most valuable aspect of the solution is the size of the outdoor access points. It's great and you can disguise them quite well."
"The connectivity is good. There's no lag at all in service."
"The deployment access in the local system is about 200 access points. External access points is more. The number is huge. There about 1,000 users in total."
"There are numerous features, but what I like about Ruckus is that they have a good coverage range due to their BeamFlex technique."
"The most valuable solution is its simplicity. The solution is simple and easy to use."
"It allows us to offer policy control."
"The 3x3 MIMO antenna provides excellent coverage and the product is well supported by Ubiquiti in terms of firmware updates."
"It has a user-friendly interface."
"The solution is easy to use and flexible."
"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."
"The indoor WiFi connection works well."
"I have found the most valuable features to be how user-friendly it is and how simple it is to do the configurations."
"This access point provides internet to every lab on campus, including the computer laboratory"
"I would like to see the billing system improved by adding a billing system integration."
"This product needs a point-to-point, bridge solution."
"Technical support is something that needs to be improved."
"They could include a firewall feature in the next release but even there it's not really necessary"
"So far, I find Ruckus Wireless WAN okay in terms of the technology and existing business network, but licensing could be more flexible, especially the IoT license that was changed to adapt to the IoT Controller and sensor subscription. The previous licensing method for Ruckus Wireless WAN was better. In my opinion, it wasn't a good decision to change it because the customer prefers the previous licensing over the current licensing. It's not only about the money in terms of licensing, but also about flexibility. The latest license change isn't as flexible. I also found the cloud solution not partner-friendly, so that could also be improved. Another area for improvement in Ruckus Wireless WAN is answering partner requests because currently, it doesn't seem easy for them. What I'd like to see in the next release of the solution is the AP having its MQTT forwarder. Ruckus Wireless WAN AP supports IoT modules now and to use the IoT modules, you need all IoT data to pass through the IoT Controller. If I could forward that IoT data directly to my environment, similar to what you can do with other solutions, that would be great."
"We had a problem with the delivery of the solution."
"I have been working with WiFi for more than 17 years. I am not able to convince customers because of the pricing of the solution. Otherwise, we could have sold lots of this tool to the customers."
"Of course, we'd always like it to be cheaper, but that's for every product."
"Their stock is a bit low compared to others, making it difficult to purchase."
"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."
"We need an official distributor in Egypt as we don't have one right now."
"Performance could be improved in the solution because when I compare it with Ruckus and other APs, some of those APs are better performing, so you don't have to deploy too many APs to get the same level of Wi-Fi coverage and stability. It's not about how many clients the solution can handle, but it is more about stability and coverage. Another room for improvement in Ubiquiti Wireless, compared to other brands, is that it doesn't do well when used in an office network. It has a limitation on how reliable the AP of the system is."
"The Unifi controller software has a small issue."
"Ubiquiti isn't as good for larger networks as any of the other wireless solutions. It lacks performance, coverage, and some of the advanced capabilities other solutions have."
"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."
"The external devices, the outdoor devices, are not so rugged. For example, for the weather that we have here in Florida, it doesn't hold up well even though it is supposed to be designed for outdoor use."
Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 45 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes " Offers robust outdoor connectivity, but signal strength and support need improvement". 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 ". Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Aruba Wireless, ExtremeCloud IQ and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our Ruckus 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.
yes. aprox. same issues at the half price
yes