Compare Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Wireless

Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 33 reviews while Cisco Wireless is ranked 2nd in Wireless LAN with 31 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Cisco Wireless is rated 8.0. 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". On the other hand, 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, whereas Cisco Wireless is most compared with Aruba Wireless, Ruckus Wireless and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Wireless report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Aruba Wireless Logo
46,718 views|39,634 comparisons
Cisco Wireless Logo
25,997 views|23,572 comparisons
Most Helpful Review
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Wireless and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Quotes From Members

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.The most valuable feature of Aruba Wireless is application monitoring.It helps the user to have a better vision of what is happening in their network.I have found the Access Point (AP) group profile feature extremely useful. It makes deployments look easy.It has helped in making deployments easier.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.

Read more »

Our organization has improved using this product because it helps enhance user experience. We use video communication a lot, like Skype. We used to get a lot of interference before and had a lot of issues during wireless voice or video calls. We get greater speed and performance with wireless now. It is nearly the same as a wired network.Wireless access has enabled users to be mobile and as a result, more productive.This increased mobility has helped our organization. We can talk to one another from different locations and stay in constant contact and with employees across the enterprise. Everyone has access to up-to-the-minute communications and all documents and applications on our network.Security is an important feature for my customers, and I am able to offer this to them with our Cisco products.It helps with the visibility on our network.You need to learn the technology but after that the setup is easy.The initial setup was quite easy. We have a very good relationship with our integrator and our integrator has a good relationship with Cisco. The integrator that installs Cisco is quite knowledgeable about the technology. They are trained and have a good relationship with their tech. We cannot be experts in each domain and we have to be supported by an integrator.Cisco Wireless is mostly stable with a low downrate and the signal rate is good. It is also easy to use.

Read more »

Cons
The urgent areas of improvement would be customer support, better tuned default settings, and documentation.For a more senior tool, a local application monitoring related to IoT vendors would be useful.They should provide usage guides and solutions to frequent problems.They should simplify the configuration flow.Additional detailed reporting for client traffic would be a great addition.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, Meraki

Read more »

The product could be improved with interference reduction. Because wireless frequency interferes with microwave or Bluetooth technologies, this causes issues. A lot of users still use legacy wireless adapters and black box and they do not experience the speed that they could get using the latest technologies. The number of devices on the market makes wireless communications complex. If the problem of interference could be resolved it would further improve utility and ease of system design.The new licensing has no added value and seems to be Cisco's effort to take advantage of customers.Improvements can be made to the telemetry. The licensing gets in the way here. It makes it impossible to record the different flows across the wireless network.The classic Cisco wireless interface is difficult for users to learn.The configuration interface could be easier. They should make roaming easier and should fix it so that when you cross a building you can keep the signal.When you integrate a network access control with authentication with an ISE engine it's really complicated to put in place.No product can be a ten out of ten and there are some security issues.One of our customers complained about the ripple, that some of the data was incorrect. We opened a ticket and brought it to their attention that maybe some of the data was not correct. As of now, it has been two months since we opened the ticket and the issue still hasn't been resolved.

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 »

Cisco licensing is usually provided on a yearly basis rather than monthly. You can get a hardware SLA or hardware and software SLA for a period of years. Longer terms influence the level of support that you get when it comes to Cisco SLA.The cost model is expensive.I think that the solution is expensive because the customer has to pay for a full year, at a minimum, in up-front costs.Cisco WiFi 1572 is very expensive locally and our budget for this year is used.It's a bit expensive but it's professional and works properly.This product's pricing is good. It's not too expensive.I feel the product's pricing is a good value.The pricing is okay. I believe it is competitively priced. But it is not just the price by itself, it's the price and the technical features. The features also play a big role. It has to give me the relevant output.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless LAN solutions are best for your needs.
370,827 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Answers from the Community
Miriam Tover
TimDavisVendor

As far as an end to end solution, Automation DNA, Security ISE, Cisco is the way to go, same goes for the comments below, RRM was around with Airespace before Aruba was a product! Also, Aruba had a blog out there about how dual 5Ghz radios were a bad joke! Well, guess who now also has dual 5Ghz radios.

15 July 19
Sujith KombraUser

Cisco’s wide range of APs and antennas is always a unique option in comparison to Aruba. Aruba very recently started having dual-band external radio APs. Otherwise, in HD deployments with an external antenna, it was a pain to deploy Aruba with two patch antenna for every AP.
As of today the latest dual 5 GHz radio model of Aruba doesn’t support external radio. So the RF design limitation with Aruba is more when compared to cisco.

14 September 19
Sales Assistant with 11-50 employeesUser

Compared to Cisco, Aruba enhances WLAN availability by providing: Ture Clustering, Live Upgrades and Loadable Service Modules

Example of True Clustering: if a client is having a VoIP call on WLAN and the controller on which the client traffic was terminated fails, the client traffic will terminate to another cluster member. The VoIP call will continue, the client will not notice any interruption.
example if Lice upgrade: Aruba can upgrade clusters without the need for a maintenance window. This is done as following:
One Cluster member is freed from APs, these APs are moved to other cluster members.
This controller is upgraded to the newest firmware. Some APs at a time are freed from clients. These clients are transferred to adjacent APs without affecting their sessions. The freed APs are upgraded and moved to the already upgraded cluster member(s). This process is repeated until all APs and controller are upgraded.

example of LSM: Aruba and Cisco are equivalent from a WLAN security certification standpoint. However, the Aruba controller is a Common Criteria accredited firewall and VPN gateway, which Cisco's controller is not. That is a key reason why in high security networks, Aruba is approved to support guest + internal Wi-Fi access on the same equipment, because it has an accredited firewall that keeps those two network separate. Cisco has to rely on VLAN separation with an external firewall, which is not as secure.

08 January 19
Anshul RohillaUser

If we will talk about the Wireless Radios of the access points, all vendor have to follow the regulatory domain as per their region, hence they not go beyond the specific dbm for wireless coverage, but how signal will propagate to the client from AP ,its depend on vendor to vendor technology . For this Aruba Air match previously know as ARM has no comparison for the performance.

if we will talk about the Aruba Solution, all product are integrated with all platform,

Like if you want to start with Cisco meraki cloud then wants to go with controller in future, they don't have integrated platform. your investment is no valuable for this kind of solution.

If we will talk about the complete solution of both the vendor, Aruba is more future rich solution than cisco. and you do not require many box in aruba solution to do the same like cisco.

Aruba Controller also manages the Aruba wired switches like access points, centralized solution for all wired, wireless and VPN.

08 January 19
Amir SultanUser

The difference is very clear and I prefer Aruba.

08 January 19
Ranking
1st
out of 21 in Wireless LAN
Views
46,718
Comparisons
39,634
Reviews
30
Average Words per Review
322
Avg. Rating
8.5
2nd
out of 21 in Wireless LAN
Views
25,997
Comparisons
23,572
Reviews
29
Average Words per Review
379
Avg. Rating
8.0
Top Comparisons
Compared 33% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Compared 55% of the time.
Compared 19% of the time.
Also Known As
Aruba WLAN, HP WLAN, HP WirelessCisco WLAN Controller
Learn
Aruba Networks
Cisco
Overview
Aruba 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
Consulate 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
REVIEWERS
University30%
Comms Service Provider13%
K 12 Educational Company Or School10%
Healthcare Company8%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company22%
Comms Service Provider15%
Retailer9%
K 12 Educational Company Or School8%
REVIEWERS
Comms Service Provider15%
K 12 Educational Company Or School15%
Mining And Metals Company15%
Manufacturing Company10%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Software R&D Company22%
Comms Service Provider18%
Manufacturing Company7%
K 12 Educational Company Or School7%
Company Size
REVIEWERS
Small Business30%
Midsize Enterprise27%
Large Enterprise43%
VISITORS READING REVIEWS
Small Business19%
Midsize Enterprise30%
Large Enterprise52%
REVIEWERS
Small Business45%
Midsize Enterprise31%
Large Enterprise24%
Find out what your peers are saying about Aruba Wireless vs. Cisco Wireless and other solutions. Updated: September 2019.
370,827 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