Compare Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN

Cisco Wireless WAN is ranked 2nd in Wireless WAN with 10 reviews while Ruckus Wireless WAN is ranked 4th in Wireless WAN with 7 reviews. Cisco Wireless WAN is rated 8.0, while Ruckus Wireless WAN is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Cisco Wireless WAN writes "Enables you to control everything, every technology within the wireless arena and has good granularity". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ruckus Wireless WAN writes "Great management features and easy to set up". Cisco Wireless WAN is most compared with Fortinet FortiExtender and Ubiquiti Wireless, whereas Ruckus Wireless WAN is most compared with Ubiquiti Wireless and Fortinet Wireless. See our Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN report.
Cancel
You must select at least 2 products to compare!
Most Helpful Review
Anonymous User
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,124 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
I like that it has integrated the cost of our network access.The most valuable features for me are the ease of operation and scalability.Granularity of standardization and technical controls.This is the most stable product in the market.Mobile anchoring and graphic user interface are helpful features.The program is very stable.The initial setup was really easy and straightforward.This stability is one of the major reasons to stick with this product.

Read more »

The solution is easy to use and offers good management for wireless.The deployment access in the local system is about 200 access points. External access points is more. The number is huge. There about 1,000 users in total.The feature I like most, is the product activity.The performance of this solution is amazing in terms of radiofrequency technology.I made some comparisons with other competitors and I found that Ruckus was number one in regards to stability.The analytic solution is good and should be improving further.The performance is very nice, the throughput is better than any other product, and it's reliable.

Read more »

Cons
The technical scalability is easy, but the license scalability is quite tricky.The cloud interoperability needs improvement.Include more managing features within the product, rather than having to purchase them as extras.The reporting feature needs improvement, especially adding information with regards to availability uptime.There is no centralized management for multiple wireless control deployments or a user tracking feature.The integration support technology should be improved.The worst thing about the Cisco controllers is that they only have two ports.The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive.

Read more »

The solution could use a better user interface.The support could be faster. It takes time for them to reply.I would like to see built-in Wi-Fi.The captive portal should be more customizable because right now, it is very limited.I have some friends who have not heard of Ruckus, but are aware of other competitors.This product needs a point-to-point, bridge solution.The pricing needs to be reconsidered because it's expensive.

Read more »

Pricing and Cost Advice
This is a very expensive solution but there are no additional costs.It is very expensive.Cisco is more expensive than other solutions.

Read more »

This solution offers a yearly subscription. The price is not high, other solutions are much higher than Ruckus.The solution is a little pricey, so customers sometimes select other products because of the price.

Read more »

report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
378,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.
Ranking
2nd
out of 8 in Wireless WAN
Views
171
Comparisons
101
Reviews
7
Average Words per Review
492
Avg. Rating
8.0
4th
out of 8 in Wireless WAN
Views
1,129
Comparisons
1,045
Reviews
4
Average Words per Review
436
Avg. Rating
8.5
Top Comparisons
Learn
Cisco
Ruckus
Overview
Cisco Wireless WAN can help your business expand rapidly while making critical applications and services available when and where needed. Your business can run applications such as interactive video and TelePresence on a primary 4G LTE WWAN link, which is 10 to 15 times faster and 5 times lower latency than 3G.

The Ruckus product portfolio of Wi-Fi, switching, IoT, LTE, software and SaaS lets you deliver a great end-user connectivity experience while reducing the amount of time you spend managing the network. And because Ruckus packs more capability into every network element, you can build that network at a lower cost per connection.

Whether your users are employees, customers, guests, residents, students, visitors, fans, or subscribers, Ruckus products are designed to enhance their experience—and yours.

Offer
Learn more about Cisco Wireless WAN
Learn more about Ruckus Wireless WAN
Sample Customers
Aegean 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)American University of Sharjah, Dordt College, Drew University, Lamar University, Raroa School
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ruckus Wireless WAN and other solutions. Updated: November 2019.
378,124 professionals have used our research since 2012.
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.
Sign Up with Email