Anonymous UserSenior Technical Consultant - HPE at a computer software company
Hansel BaroSenior Site Reliability Engineer / System Administrator at a hospitality company
We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
"The performance is good."
"The most important is that the solution is stable."
"The solution is easy to use."
"The main benefit of this product is the lifetime warranty, up to 99 years. For example, if your switch card fails after 10 years, and the hardware fails, it will be replaced with the very same switch or the equivalent model available at the time."
"It's easy to use."
"The most valuable features of this solution are it supports the newest virus technology, which helps with bandwidth, and is very stable."
"We use the solution for many of our smaller customers and the cloud management aspect of the solution is very good. If you compare it to other vendors that have a controller, it's much easier to manage the cloud-based solution because we travel a lot. It allows us to manage everything from any place."
"The indoor WiFi connection works well."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is a reasonably priced, easy to use, stable and reliable product."
"This is a high-quality solution that allows us to provide wifi access points in challenging areas."
"It's very easy to use. The hardware is very easy to use, compared to Microsoft. Microsoft is more complicated. It has software that is okay if you are familiar with it. In my opinion, Ubiquiti hardware is more heavy duty then Microsoft."
"One of the nice features is the backup version control."
"It's a well priced solution and as far as I'm concerned, it's enterprise class."
"I like that it's cheaper and inexpensive. It's also easy to use."
"It should be a faster device."
"It's very old-fashioned, which is why we have made the decision to replace it."
"Technical support could be improved. They could respond a bit faster."
"HPE Wireless WAN could provide better access points and better pricing."
"The scalability and the support could be better."
"In the next release of the solution, there should be better integration with other platforms."
"We tried to create an access point with built-in voice and sound that we could use in schools, for example. We tried to create something that could play sounds or messages out of the access points. We wanted to, for example, use it as a school bell instead of using other equipment. It didn't work very well. It turns out when you connect to the Ubiquiti Wireless access point, it's not possible to send simple messages (like what is going on in the canteen, or some news update for the school, etc.). We had to use the on-premises version, as the cloud version wouldn't allow for this."
"Some of our customers have reported problems with their outdoor WiFi connections."
"The product lacks some security features."
"There is really nothing wrong with the product but there are ways the utility and features can be expanded to meet future demands."
"They should make more advanced features for the power users. I am a technician and I am functional, but I do need some features that I find only in Microsoft."
"Better third-party integration would be helpful because often, Ubiquity is a product that customers choose after they already have something else from another vendor like HPE."
"There's one feature missing and that is automatic channel assignment."
"They should have more VLAN features and a designing tool like a link planer."
"I find the price to be reasonable."
"Price wise, it is on the medium end of the scale. It could be lower."
"We don't pay a licensing fee, we purchased the product."
"There is a license for this solution and the license is normally paid annually but this depends on the contract."
"The price of this solution is ok."
"The product is a very good price."
"Right now the product is less expensive and of higher quality than other solutions."
"The price is reasonable and there's only a one-time payment. We have had this for a long time and I haven't seen any additional fee after paying for the installation."
"In South Africa, for some Cisco access points, it will cost you 10,000 Rand ($690 USD), whereas with Ubiquity that same access point will cost you less than 3,000 Rand ($210 USD)."
"The product is expensive."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is affordable."
"If you do not have a big budget, you can use Ubiquiti, it is cost-effective."
HPE Wireless WAN is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 6 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 25 reviews. HPE Wireless WAN is rated 7.0, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of HPE Wireless WAN writes "Provides network security, is user friendly, stable, and scalable, and has a lifetime warranty". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ubiquiti Wireless writes "Extremely easy to set up and has never failed on me". HPE Wireless WAN is most compared with , whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium and Fortinet FortiWLM. See our HPE Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless 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.