Cisco is a good product but is old and very monolithic. They are working to improve but their mindset is different.

The solution is the future because it integrates with the cloud and addresses new needs. We prefer the design and strategy of the solution over Cisco. 

We evaluated Cisco Meraki and Ubiquiti. The price of Cisco is very high compared to Aruba and Ubiquiti.

Aruba is an excellent option for campus wireless. It can be more labor intensive initially than other options, such as Cisco Meraki, however it provides a reliable wireless platform that can be easily maintained by a small network team.

Our company looked at a few other options, but chose Aruba based on recommendations from other large businesses that compare in size/scope to ours.

I've worked with Cisco and Mojo solutions.

I evaluated Ruckus and Meraki Wireless before choosing the solution.

We did not evaluate other options because we wanted one integrated solution which incorporated both wired and wireless, and with Aruba Wireless, we got the full package.

I evaluated Cisco Wireless.

Before choosing this product, we also evaluated Cisco, Extreme Networks (Enterasys at the time), and Xirrus. This process was completed before I came aboard.

We looked at Fortinet, Aruba, and several other vendors. Ultimately, we found that Aruba was by far the best.

We did not consider any other options before choosing Aruba.

We needed a more centrally-managed solution so that you didn't have to manage each individual AP. When we sought out quotes, we looked at Aruba, Meru, Cisco, and a couple of others. Based on the features and the scalability and all the deployment solutions and everything that we needed, Aruba was the best solution for us.

We decided to change to Juniper because it looked right, and because of the easy management.

Based on our evaluations, we are considering Ruckus and Ubiquiti over Aruba since Ruckus' and Ubiquiti's functions and settings are okay, making them easy to use.

I'm not involved in the decision-making process regarding looking at solutions.

We were looking at different products for our new premises. Aruba was known to me so I compared Aruba with Ruckus.

We had been working with vendors like Cisco and Ruckus.

HP and Cisco. HP was not secure enough. We had HP in house already. We looked at Cisco but did not do a demo or work with a partner. We do not have any Cisco in house. From my own research, Cisco was too expensive and did not have a solution that was a single appliance that could do all of the things that Aruba can do. Their solution required firewalls, controllers, and routers to accomplish the same thing. This may no longer be the case.

We also work with Cisco products.

We are looking at Stellar solutions currently as an alternative: OmniAccess Stellar solutions. The new product line from Alcatel is what we are using for it.

We evaluated Ubiquiti, Hive, Netgear, Cisco, and Meraki.

I can't remember, but we probably did.

We looked at other vendors before deciding on Aruba.

We evaluated Cisco. Cisco's solution, at the time, required additional components to provide the same functionality. For example you'd need external firewalls, IDS/IPS, and authentication servers. Aruba controllers had all this built in. I haven't looked at Cisco's current offerings, so this may not still be the case.

I did look at Ubiquiti because the price point was cheap. But after looking further into it, the main reason I chose Aruba was because they have a lifetime warranty on their APs.

No, we received guidance from others in our community and stuck with Aruba.

While we really like Aruba, we usually are researching other solutions also, as you have to know what you're competing against.

At the time when we first started using them, we did not evaluate other options. They seemed to be only ones back then who could cluster APs without requiring a separate controller.

I have used all three and Cisco is more complicated than Aruba Wireless.

We always evaluate options to see what's best. For example, sometimes, the ARM is more relative, and Aruba is more efficient than others. Cisco has the same functionality, but sometimes the main link will disconnect the users. You don't have that problem with Aruba Wireless. 

We didn't look at other solutions as HP is the company standard.

Any time we have a project we must have three viable options to choose from. We looked at HP, Cisco and Meru.

I looked at Cisco and I can't remember the other vendor. Once again, Cisco was price-point was higher. Aruba gave me every feature I needed and more so they were a good fit for us.

We also looked at Cisco Wireless products.

We did a massive comparison with most of the WLAN vendors and from those we chose Aruba.

Meru, Cisco, Aerohive. 

We evaluated Cisco APs. Aruba's APs are nice and the management solutions are pretty good. Cisco and Aruba play nicely together.

• Cisco
• Eugenius
• Ubiquity

We always evaluate other options when considering IT solutions. We looked at Cisco and Juniper, but HP/Aruba is better.

No! We only evaluated Aruba.

We've done several migrations from competitive products, but Aruba is better because of the technology and the price. They also integrate well with other Aruba applications, such as ClearPass.

Yes we also evaluated Cisco Lightweight APs.

We looked at HP/Aruba and Cisco.

I am currently looking into dealing with similar products from Huawei. In our market, we are competing with other implementors.

I tried Cisco, Ruckus, Proxim, and Juniper.

Cisco.

It is always in comparison with Cisco Meraki and Ruckus, but Aruba is outstanding, especially when it comes to the hospitality sectors.