Mist AI and Cloud Reviews

I work in the government sector. 

The product feature set is extremely good and there was lots of visibility into different things that were not only network-related. 

I found the inter-functionality with other vendors a negative, and we weren't particularly happy with their sales model when it came to roll-out and implementation. 

I worked briefly with this product. 

The sales support team was real pushy in the beginning, and when we tried to implement and had some issues, they disappeared and then wanted their things returned.

Mist was messy for us and the product was more than we needed in our schools. It's not necessarily a bad solution but not well suited to our use case so I rate it six out of 10. 

The cost is the most valuable aspect of this solution. 

The user experience should be improved. It's not user-friendly. 

The stability and scalability are good. We have around 500 users. We aren't sure if we are going to increase usage. 

We haven't needed to contact technical support. 

The best solution is Meraki. 

The initial setup is complicated. We did the setup ourselves. 

I would rate it a six out of ten. Not a ten because I don't really like this solution. It doesn't have a good user interface. 

I would recommend Meraki over this solution. 

Our customer's primary use case is internet connectivity. 

If you compare wired versus wireless, it's convenient. You don't need to have one place for connectivity. You can move around and it's easier. Sometimes it's a hassle to work with wires, which is why wireless is so convenient.

The solution offers good availability.

The connection is very fast.

From a network administrator's point of view, visibility and management are good.

There seems to be different versions of standards used in the wireless access points. In the future, it would be helpful if the solution could come up with some kind of universal standard for all devices and all access points.

The wireless radio power needs adjustment. Different countries have different power ratings in decibel levels. While one country may have certain levels, another country will have different ones. All countries should have one standard of controlling power levels and frequencies. That way, it will be easier for us to plan with different brands. 

We don't specifically use the solution; we're integrators and we sell it to clients.

The solution is scalable as long as the network is planned properly. If the planning is done correctly, the signal won't drop in and out.

The level of scalability a user will get from Mist depends on the way they plan everything. If a company doesn't plan its wireless network properly, then it will have issues. The capacity and the distance for which an access point can serve depends on the network planning. 

If it is planned properly then it'll run smoothly. If not, it's possible that a company will have issues that will be very difficult to trace. For example, sometimes they will have the connectivity they expect, and sometimes they will not. All of a sudden the connections may drop. Moving from one location to another, the connection may disappear. Therefore, it's really important to plan.

While there may be members of my team that have contacted technical support in the past, I personally have not, so I can't speak to how reliable they are. I just don't know.

The initial setup is pretty straightforward. When it comes to installation, usually, if you're familiar with the product, it doesn't matter which brand or which model you are handling. The installation and connection are typically more or less standard across different brands. 

Most of the time you do need some technical background to handle implementation. You need to have some way of accessing the control interface of the access point in order to enable it.

We're a partner.

We work with different deployment options depending on the customer. If the company is isolated to one or two access points in a place, we probably will use the cloud. If it is a big organization, where internal traffic is heavy, we might use on-premise controllers. Sometimes, maybe a hybrid is necessary. It depends on the customer.

I would advise other companies to plan the solution's implementation properly and do some background study because there are certain access points banned from certain countries. They need to know which product you can use. Then they need to have an idea about the limitations because there are capacity limitations and distance limitations for any access point. After that, it's important to plan inside the building (in terms of layout). How the access points are arranged will depend on where the walls are as well as the ceiling height. Every company needs to do some background study and plan properly with suitable technical consultation. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten mostly because there are certain limitations in wireless. There are certain cases where you need to go wired. If there's a very high bandwidth requirement, there are distance limitations, if there is a server requirement, or if there are any deep securities required, you can't use wireless.

For the time being, I am only using these access points on a demo.

The triangulation feature can be used to determine where a person is in relation to the access point. That's a cool feature.

The main problem is that the power consumption for the access point is always screaming that it needs more power. It's supposed to be POE and I set it up as the recommend POE supply, and it's still screaming that it needs more power. In comparison, I have no such problem with my Aruba system.

I have been using the Mist Access Points for approximately nine months.

Since I upgraded the firmware, it has been a stable product. However, I have a lot of the features turned off because of the power problems with it.

I also use Aruba wireless, and I am happier with that product. For example, I do not have the problem with power consumption that I am having with Mist.

The price of this product is approximately the same as competing products in the market. 

Overall, I am not too happy with Mist Access Points.

I would rate this solution a three out of ten.

Our primary use case depends on the situation. Sometimes we deploy it on a service level and we have data centers that we provide this kind of service to. But mostly we do it through partners, system integrators or resellers.

The kinds of businesses using the solution would be hotels, large conference venues, banquet halls, and things like that. We also work with a school. It's all about management. 

The most valuable feature would be the center life management, by which I mean being able to control the access points by groups. 

The configuration could be improved. 

We've been using the product for a couple of years. 

It's a stable product, we don't have any major issues with it. 

I wouldn't say that the initial setup was straightforward, but it wasn't overly complex either. The difficulties related to configuration. The setup experience was somewhere in the middle, average. Deployment really depends on the size of the installation. 

Setup cost was quite expensive, it's a concern. 

I would rate this product a six out of 10.