Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless

Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 28 reviews vs Cisco Wireless which is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 8 reviews. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "Some of the implementations or features do work as advertised. Urgent areas of improvement would be customer support, better tuned default settings, and documentation". The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless writes "Clean Air Solution can detect non-WiFi signals, change channel to avoid unwanted signals". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and Ruckus Wireless. Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Aerohive Networks and Huawei Wireless. See our Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
+Add products to compare
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless and others in Wireless LAN.
279,610 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Quotes From Members Comparing Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
Pros
With Aruba Wireless Controller, all our access points are connected to one controller. Through that controller, we can actually handle each access point; we can disconnect or connect that access point, and then we can tell, or see, or allow how many users are, or should be, connected through that access point.The most important feature is all about the two wavelengths, the 2.4GHz and the 5GHz, and the access points which are connected to this wireless controller.If we really want to know where a specific user is connected, it gives us the ability to see that and how that user is actually receiving. We can know the speed and their IP, their MAC address and, most of the time, how much bandwidth they're using per day.The dashboard tells us who is using most of the bandwidth, and how many APs are not in good range, or that do not actually have good security. It shows us which users are trying to hack or how many users are trying to use BitTorrent. So it gives us very good visibility into the user.It provides superior WiFi access and RF management.The web interface to manage the APs is intuitive and makes managing the system easy. Firmware updates are quick and do not require much downtime.Scalability has been one of the easiest aspects of the Aruba Instant product line. As long as the models are compatible, you can simply connect it to your network and it will learn the settings from the other APs on the network and join the AP network.We have three wireless networks: One for employee use, one for guest use, and one for our warehouse use, which uses MAC authentication. These wireless networks just simply work, they do not fail. The IAP-205 devices are very strong with great range. Very durable equipment; it always works.

Read more »

It helps with the visibility on our network.The ability to deploy wireless access points with templates.It gave us the ability to view wireless traffic, unwanted devices on the network, and how they affected overall network performance.Cisco Wireless gave us the ability to deploy and seamlessly manage wireless devices at our corporate office and remote locations.The switches can even detect cable issues which quite often can be the main cause for a call-out within my business.This product has a Clean Air Solution, which means it can detect non-WiFi signals. It not only signals but it can also detect that what type of device it is coming from. And if it needs to change the channel in order to avoid that unwanted signal, it can do so and that way the client machine will have better performance.Compared to other solutions, captive guest network is one of the best isolation and tunneling.The ability to disable RRM or set hybrid RRM provides a more granular design of RF in the environment.

Read more »

Cons
The speed could be better. I heard that Aruba is trying to shape the speed inside the wireless controller, but that has not been adopted yet. If they put some kind of mechanism inside the wireless controller for the speed such that, "Okay, this many users will have 20 by 20 - 20 in the upload, 20 in the download. Just this many users. And this many users will have that type of speed." I think it would be very good if they actually bring that functionality inside the wireless controller.Every month Aruba has new firmware. I don't know if it's good or bad but it's not good in terms of production. We can't upgrade our firmware every month, especially an enterprise company, because if we upgrade our firmware based on the latest firmware that Aruba has, that firmware is not stable. They're not 100 percent sure about it.The new 8400 failed at Lab, plus its integration with Aruba Central.Customer service really needs to be improved. If the customer support was better, I would recommend it to others more than I do now. Considering that you have to pay yearly for support, I expect a higher level of support.The Aruba Central cloud portal needs a lot of work. It is complicated to navigate.I believe it would benefit from more reporting, other than just a dashboard. It needs some type of report builder so you can have PDFs to show upper management what is going on in the wireless network.Access point mounting options could be better.​Some additional reporting features about the clients would be nice when not combined with the AirWave management package.​

Read more »

Most definitely the cost.If needs to provide more visibility. It can detect and do it, but as technicians we don't have a lot of visibility into seeing exactly what's happening. It doesn't give us a lot of log information for us to troubleshoot. They probably have additional software you need to purchase to get that kind of information. But I think not all companies can afford additional software to see those kinds of details. So if the wireless controller already had, built-in, those types of things for the technician or wireless engineer, it would be more attractive for the end-user.Improvement needed in RRM, ATF, Ortho-Polarization, AP concurrent client processing.The bind configuration between a physical port and an IP address is missing.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
It's not expensive. That is the reason we switched to Aruba.Pricing is competitive. Licensing is needed to maintain access to the latest firmware, which wasn't made clear originally when we started with Arbua (or things changed, I'm not sure which). I would just say, make sure you budget for it.A recent change is that ClearPass licensing is superb. It counts user-based instead of device-based, for BYOD on-boarding.​AP signal strength and price. I know this is a competitive market, but APs should not cost so much if they do not cover a large area. ​The system was very good, but we needed to upgrade in order to adapt for our needs, and doing so with Aruba would have been more expensive. ​Besides paying for the APs, you need to pay a license each year for their use. Therefore, watch out for that and do the best you can to keep costs down.​I am aiding in transitioning my organization to a different wireless solution due to the cost. We need to expand our network and the cost of new APs and an upgraded controller have proved to be prohibitive compared to similar solutions on the market.​The price point is pretty high compared to Ubiquiti and other equipment.

Read more »

Cisco WiFi 1572 is very expensive locally and our budget for this year is used.I am not a fan of Cisco's software pricing model. Their management software is far too expensive.Cisco is more on the expensive side, as compared to Aruba, but I must say Cisco's quality is unmatched, for sure.As far as I know Cisco is very competitive, price-wise. Talk to your third-party vendor. It all depends on the company size - how many employees, how big the building is. If it's wireless, and you have only 50 employees but you're using a large building floor, in that case you need many access points. But if you have 50 employees using two or three rooms, then you probably don't need it and it's going to be high density, so there is a different design. So you need to talk to a subject matter expert. Talk to them and design accordingly.Expensive.It is an expensive solution.

Read more »

Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless and others in Wireless LAN.
279,610 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
RANKING
Views
42,657
Comparisons
28,279
Reviews
25
Followers
1,338
Avg. Rating
8.4
Views
22,237
Comparisons
18,080
Reviews
6
Followers
1,085
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Top Comparisons
Compared 47% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
See more Aruba Wireless competitors »
Compared 75% of the time.
Compared 6% of the time.
Compared 4% of the time.
See more Cisco Wireless competitors »
Also Known As
Also Known AsAruba WLAN, HP WLAN, HP WirelessCisco WLAN Controller
Website/Video
Website/VideoAruba Networks
Cisco
Overview
OverviewAruba deliver superb Wireless performance and multi-user MIMO aware ClientMatch to boost network efficiency and support the growing device density and app demands on your network.With Cisco Wireless you will successfully plan, deploy, monitor, troubleshoot, and report on indoor and outdoor wireless networks - all from a centralized location.
OFFER
Learn more about Aruba Wireless
Learn more about Cisco Wireless
Sample Customers
Sample CustomersConsulate Health Care, Los Angeles Unified School District, Science Applications International Corp (SAIC), San Diego State University, KFC, ACTS Retirement-Life CommunitiesAegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
Top Industries
Top Industries
REVIEWERS
University
35%
K 12 Educational Company Or School
12%
Financial Services Firm
9%
Healthcare Company
9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm
12%
Comms Service Provider
12%
University
12%
Non Tech Company
9%
REVIEWERS
K 12 Educational Company Or School
27%
Comms Service Provider
18%
Insurance Company
9%
Government
9%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Comms Service Provider
13%
Financial Services Firm
12%
K 12 Educational Company Or School
10%
Non Tech Company
7%
Company Size
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business
30%
Midsize Enterprise
24%
Large Enterprise
46%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
23%
Midsize Enterprise
33%
Large Enterprise
44%
REVIEWERS
Small Business
48%
Midsize Enterprise
33%
Large Enterprise
19%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
24%
Midsize Enterprise
19%
Large Enterprise
57%
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless and others in Wireless LAN.
Download now
279,610 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.

Sign Up with Email