Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless

Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 32 reviews vs Cisco Wireless which is ranked 3rd in Wireless LAN with 13 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.
288,321 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
It has an aesthetically pleasing GUI for configuration.It delivers constantly, there is no break in the internet using these devices. It also automatically gets connected when the internet comes back. Failure is very low.The performance and the application monitor. You can select the applications you want to use and block on your networkWith the central management system, I'm able to access each device. I can configure one device and then it provisions all the other devices with the same configuration, rather than my having to configure them one by one.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.

Read more »

For me, there are two important features: 1) WLAN grouping – Allows us to have different groups and, within those groups, specific WLANs, so there is no overlapping. 2) FlexConnect – Enables us to have remote offices at different locations. We can have a central WLC to control all the locations.Identity PSK helps save SSIDs.The most valuable feature of this solution is its securityDevice profiling allows us to have different policies applied by ISE to wireless clients.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.

Read more »

Cons
The urgent areas of improvement would be customer support, better tuned default settings, and documentation.What I would like to have with these kinds of devices is the most enhanced security. For example, if I could apply security from wireless devices, that would be great. I would also like more enhanced reports on user adoption, who is getting what bandwidth.I would like to be able to customize Captive Portals.The management system would be better if it were more polished, if it had a better interface like, for example, MerakiIf you want a centralized management system that is able to manage all your networking devices such as the wireless, the switch, the routers, and the firewall, then Aruba may not be the one, because Aruba doesn't do firewalls.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.

Read more »

There is room for improvement regarding HA issues and Radius integration.The software quality could be improved, in particular for the new Cisco Aironet Series 2800/3800 Access Point which is pretty Linux-based.Many wireless controllers' firmware have bugs in their new releases, which are not stable, especially in an environment with many wireless AP (WAP) types.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
Get multiple bids/quotes, and talk to the representatives about the limitations of the product; pretty standard.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.​

Read more »

Pricing is a bit on the high side compared to its competitors but we have to consider the support and usages of the solution. Licensing is now RTU and smart licensing. We need three types of licenses. One for each of the: APs, HA, controller.Never pay the full GPL price.The pricing is high. It could be cheaper.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.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
288,321 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
RANKING
Views
45,845
Comparisons
29,174
Reviews
27
Followers
1,362
Avg. Rating
8.5
Views
23,923
Comparisons
18,463
Reviews
10
Followers
1,102
Avg. Rating
8.3
Top Comparisons
Top Comparisons
Compared 46% of the time.
Compared 14% of the time.
See more Aruba Wireless competitors »
Compared 73% 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
33%
K 12 Educational Company Or School
11%
Comms Service Provider
8%
Healthcare Company
8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
12%
University
12%
Non Tech Company
9%
REVIEWERS
K 12 Educational Company Or School
25%
Comms Service Provider
17%
Non Tech Company
8%
Mining And Metals Company
8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Financial Services Firm
13%
Comms Service Provider
13%
K 12 Educational Company Or School
10%
Non Tech Company
7%
Company Size
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business
30%
Midsize Enterprise
26%
Large Enterprise
44%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
23%
Midsize Enterprise
33%
Large Enterprise
44%
REVIEWERS
Small Business
50%
Midsize Enterprise
31%
Large Enterprise
19%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business
25%
Midsize Enterprise
19%
Large Enterprise
56%
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs Cisco Wireless and others in Wireless LAN.
Download now
288,321 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