Mist Access Points Alternatives and Competitors

Get our free report covering Cisco, Aruba Networks, Cisco, and other competitors of Mist Access Points. Updated: February 2021.
465,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Read reviews of Mist Access Points alternatives and competitors

Network and Security Consultant at a insurance company with 1,001-5,000 employees
Top 10
Oct 22, 2020
Overall a good product that provides role-based authentication native to the controller, but has code stability issues

What is our primary use case?

We run a number of guest wireless networks with captive portals with layer 3 networks. We run .1x for corporate SSIDs or wireless networks for additional certificate-based and/or WPA2 security.

Pros and Cons

  • "Aruba is an industry leader. The hardware is on par, and its performance is also on par with anybody else. The Aruba brand really only focuses on wireless, so they're not competing their R&D for switching data center products and cloud security. They're really focused on that and their underlying key pieces. They provide a role-based authentication that is native to the controller. A lot of other systems don't do that. They won't provide you the ability to basically have everybody join the network, regardless of whether or not they share the same network space, the SSID, or the wireless LAN. You can segment it down to a specific user role based on any kind of attributes that you like. That's their differentiator. If you need per user, per device, or per port segmentation, you can get that with Aruba. There isn't another vendor who does it."
  • "Currently, the stability of the code is the basic underlying problem for us. They had an 8.6 release that came out two weeks ago, but we had to migrate twice because the code wasn't stable. We can't get things to work the same way. Version 8 was a big change for them. They made a change so that it is forced to be a managed hierarchical system. It means that you make changes at the top, and it pushes them downstream. There are a lot of problems with the 8.6 version code. I ran into four bugs in one week and was informed that we should just move onto the next one because all of those fixes have taken place. The feedback loop for fixes is not always really relayed back to you. I don't have a lot of strong things to say about version 8.6. When we had version 6, the controller was pretty much rock solid. We had no problems. We made a heavy investment to migrate a lot of stuff to take advantage of things like WPA3, Wi-Fi 6, and all that kind of stuff, and we haven't been able to turn those features on because we are not confident that they are going to work just yet. So, right now, we're still very much stumbling through the version 8.6 code and just trying to make sure that it is safe before we turn on some of those features. In terms of the marketplace, they are one of the top three leaders. In some respects, one of the things that they focus on is wireless. Therefore, there are some things that should be beyond reproach, as far as I'm concerned. In terms of the stability of the code, there are always going to be bugs, but the core stability of the code needs to be there. When it is not stable, that's a real problem for me because you lose a lot of confidence in the products."

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend Aruba Wireless, but it depends on the size and the scope. If you are a large-scale enterprise, you are going to need to deploy something large. If you are a big university or something, you are going to have to pick one of the big three, which, in this case, is going to be Cisco, Aruba, or Juniper. Juniper's Mist is a recent addition that is hugely popular right now because of a lot of the stuff it does in the cloud. They are all cloud-based controllers, and they integrate machine learning into all of your analytics to give you data. I think that Aruba Wireless is a good…
Tim Brumbaugh
Solutions Architect at Golden West Technologies
Real User
Top 5
Dec 18, 2020
Great performance, easy to set up and simple to configure

What is our primary use case?

We primarily use the solution for its performance, compatibility, and general capabilities. We do a lot of schools, colleges, large civic centers, large arenas, etc. That kind of stuff. We know how to deploy this so that the clients get great client connectivity.

Pros and Cons

  • "The product has some very awesome patents on their radios and their antennas and antenna patterns and how their signaling works. That's why nobody can touch them. If they go head to head with anybody."
  • "The cost could be slightly improved. It's not on the low end, and it's not in the high end. It's in that middle area, which can be a deciding factor between someone going with this solution versus another one."

What other advice do I have?

We're a reseller as well as a customer. We're running the latest software. We deploy through a controller and we use 802.1X. There're multiple ways to deploy to customers. There's a cloud controller, for example. We typically do a virtual controller on their systems. If a company is new to Ruckus, it's best to work with a partner. You need somebody that knows what they're doing, and knows what questions to ask so that you're getting the right information. When I go to do an implementation, I've got a list of 50 different questions. I'll ask somebody, what about this? What about this? What…
Marc Gaethofs
ICT manager at a real estate/law firm with 11-50 employees
Real User
Top 20
Feb 24, 2021
A highly stable solution held back by limited controllers

What is our primary use case?

We have a business center with about 600 tenants. We use Cisco wireless throughout our business center. We have a coverage shortfall for WiFi access for our customers. We have 600 users in our building spread between roughly 20 to 25 different companies. We all have different needs and different security issues.

Pros and Cons

  • "This solution is highly stable. We have only had one issue in seven years."
  • "The flexibility on the controllers isn't that great."

What other advice do I have?

I would recommend this solution to other users. If you're interested in Cisco, Meraki is a good choice, but they are lagging a little bit behind in terms of technology. If you compare Aruba with Mist, Mist has the most advanced wireless solutions that you can possibly get at the moment. After over seven years of use, overall, on a scale from one to ten, I would give this solution a rating of seven.
Alexandra Cevallos
Project Engineer at CIEMTELCOM
Real User
Top 20
Jan 23, 2021
Good dashboard, great support, and easy to manage and configure

What is our primary use case?

I use this solution for wireless.

What is most valuable?

It is easy to manage and configure. The dashboard of Meraki is easy to use.

What needs improvement?

Currently, only a limited number of clients can connect to these devices.

For how long have I used the solution?

I have been using this solution for three years.

What do I think about the scalability of the solution?

Our clients are small and medium companies, and we didn't have any problems with scalability. Our clients may increase its usage in the future.

How are customer service and technical support?

Their support is great. Its documentation is also good.

Which solution did I use previously and why did I switch?

I used Juniper Mist. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is easy to use in…
Get our free report covering Cisco, Aruba Networks, Cisco, and other competitors of Mist Access Points. Updated: February 2021.
465,836 professionals have used our research since 2012.