We performed a comparison between Aruba Networks Wireless WAN and Fortinet FortiExtender 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."An engineer with enough experience can tune the network however they want. It's crucial. It's good to customize our information security how we like it and configure the solution to achieve the level of stability we need."
"The solution's strong security mechanism and user-friendly web console are great."
"There is a clustering feature, so the APs immediately switch back to the next available controller. The users will not notice any impact and will feel connected to the network. They will not notice any disconnection."
"The most valuable feature of Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is centralized management capability. You don't have to have wireless LAN controllers at every location."
"It's stable and reliable."
"The GUI offered by the product is good."
"I like the way that it integrates with the ClearPass security system on-site."
"All the features are available, even including the security. The access point enables the matching of any connectivity."
"Management can be carried out from a central point."
"For me, the best feature of Fortinet FortiExtender is its integration with an external solution such as a 5G LTE broadband modem, wired modem, and cellular network. I also like that the product can be integrated into one device or a unified device, and that is one of its best features because it allows you to manage and centralize the control of every device."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"Technical support is important to me and I feel that it is something that can be improved."
"This solution needs different models that are more specialized for certain customers."
"Support is not good...The support can be improved, especially in India, since whenever I require support, it takes some time."
"Right now, the integration between the support that you are getting from Hewlett-Packard, which is the parent company, and Aruba, they're not meshing together."
"This product needs more flecibility with switching technologies."
"It would be better for customers if Aruba provided more license options, like 5-year licenses"
"Support is a little expensive. It's also a little tricky to configure Aruba sometimes. For example, if we want to whitelist a device, it works in unexpected ways. I want to allow this device to connect somewhere, and it lets it connect to any device in the network. Let's say I want to allow my phone to connect to the network printer, but if I add my phone to the white list, I automatically allow my phone to connect to any other devices, and it's not secure."
"The integration, pricing, and configuration could always be improved upon."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"The support could be faster and more responsive."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is ranked 5th in Wireless WAN with 46 reviews while Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews. Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is rated 8.4, while Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2. 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 Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". Aruba Networks Wireless WAN is most compared with Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Ubiquiti Wireless, Fortinet FortiWLM and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN. See our Aruba Networks Wireless WAN vs. Fortinet FortiExtender 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.