Ubiquiti Wireless Reviews

The primary use cases of this solution include home use and hospitality, for example: small cafes, etc. It's used in most small businesses where they just need a few ITs and they need simple management, which also means that they're not too worried about the security.

Cost is a big value to the customer and that's the main thing with Ubiquiti Wireless. They don't really have any features that stand out, that would distinguish them from other vendors, so it's all about their pricing. The most attractive thing about them is their cost.

What would make this solution better is improved security. Nowadays, with consumer and enterprise level, most of the access points that I work with, e.g. Aruba, Cambium, or Ruckus, etc., they have firewalls built into the access points and they can do deep packet inspection of data coming through the access point. This gives you the ability to identify applications and you can secure and manage based on application. Ubiquiti Wireless is already simplified, so they don't do that.

The performance of Ubiquiti Wireless also needs some improvement. Though performance is very difficult to quantify because if it's performance based on one or two access points in a home, Ubiquiti Wireless is fantastic, but their performance is lacking in large environments. They end up creating problems in larger environments.

I've had people put this in and because Ubiquiti Wireless doesn't solve tune and they weren't capable of tuning it themselves, they ended up with six access points, but the power and the channel assignments have been all wrong, so they haven't been getting any benefit out of the access points.

Ubiquiti Wireless also tends to turn the access points up to the maximum power, and if you're designing an enterprise network, you need to actually turn the power down on your access point and increase the density of your access points to give proper performance improvements. They're not an enterprise product. They're a home and consumer and small business product.

Scalability is an issue. Ease of manageability at scale is also an issue. For example, looking at one of its competitors: Aruba, you can easily scale that to 500 to a thousand access points and still have it all under control.

You also have the ability to do software-defined wireless networking with competitors of Ubiquiti Wireless, which is something you can't really do with Ubiquiti. Ubiquiti Wireless is a point solution.

I have a long list of things that they've got to do to improve the product. There's so many things that they need to do. One of the things that is quite important is that they get rid of the cloud key and have smart insight and access points.

With the other vendors, you buy the access points, then access the virtual controller which will give you that connection into your cloud management. With Ubiquiti Wireless, you have to buy a separate cloud key, or you have to run a separate software server, or you have to buy a Dream Machine Pro or a Dream Machine just to manage your network remotely. They need to move away from that and move to clustering and Virtual Controller in their IP.

I've been working with Ubiquiti Wireless for two years.

If I we're to rate the stability of Ubiquiti Wireless, I'll rate it a six out ten. They have a reputation of crashing when you do a firmware update sometimes.

Ubiquiti Wireless is not easy to scale. Scalability is a problem. Get your five AP (access points) and you're fine, but if you want to put 50 AP, you'll have a big problem. It's not scalable.

Another thing is from the management perspective with cloud keys and the way that they use cloud keys, it isn't scalable.

It's also not multi-tenanted, so you can't really use it. When you have multiple branches and sites, management becomes a big problem.

Ubiquiti Wireless doesn't have any support that you can call. I've used their online support and it's not great. Part of their value proposition is they're super cheap because there's no tech that you can call. You can't find an engineer to speak to, or to help you.

A lot of the support is done through the online portal, so if you want technical answers on how to fix issues, you have to go to the community. After everything's installed, they make people figure out issues and solutions for themselves. Their support documentation is not fantastic.

Setting up Ubiquiti Wireless is very simple, very basic.

To set up a network: getting access points installed, and depending on what I was using for a firewall, and getting an SSID secured and set up, it takes 20 to 30 minutes. That does not include mounting it anywhere, but just getting it out of the box, connecting it to a switch, then actually getting it configured. It's straightforward.

The price point for Ubiquiti Wireless is really good.

I've worked with Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, Cambium, and Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I'm a wireless specialist. That's what I do. I design wireless and put them in.

Deployment of Ubiquiti Wireless depends on the customers, but it's not deployed on my premises. I sell it and I design it. I'm an engineer who designs for customers, so we deploy it in different scenarios, but mostly it's deployed into the small business type of environments.

This solution requires regularly maintenance. You have to do firmware updates, and that's it.

My advice to people looking into using this product is that first of all, it would depend on what they are doing. What type of network implementation are they going to do?

Before I give advice, I would be asking a lot of questions. If Ubiquiti Wireless will be used in an educational institution, or in an institution that requires a higher level of security, or one that requires ease of management or good scalability, I will tell them not to use it.

If it will be used in a little cafe and they want to put two access points in, and they want a little guest network that people can sign in, and they want people to be able to log in through Facebook, etc., then using Ubiquiti Wireless will be fine.

Ubiquiti Wireless is a seven out of ten for me, because of its target market, and it does what it's supposed to do in the market it's supposed to be in. It's really good for its price point and for its target market.

I work with Ingram Micro and we sell a large amount of Ubiquiti Wireless, and there's a lot of SME that use them quite successfully. It's just that large implementations can become a huge challenge with this solution.

This solution is widely used in Iraq. 

We primarily use the solution as an access point for hotels. If you want to install a wireless system, you use the products called Unifi access points, and it has a couple of models, like the UAP-AC-LR and a UAP-AC-Pro. This is for making a system for wireless setups for hotels, hospitals, and universities.

The mesh system is great. It enables you to have only one signal for the whole building. For the Mesh system, they have made a new product called Cloud Key, which enables you to keep control of the system. It might be called d the Unifi Cloud Key Gen2. It allows you to control the Mesh system access points remotely, without being connected to the same network. 

It's simple to use.

The setup is quite simple. 

It is stable. 

The Unifi controller software has a small issue. When you install it on one PC, it will be stuck to the same PC. You have to reset the wifi access point to access it from another computer.

We suffer from this issue all around Iraq. If you want in the future to add some features to the access point from another PC, you cannot. You have to make a reset, a hardware reset to the device, and then install the software again. This is very annoying.

I've been using the solution since 2012. I've used it for almost ten years. 

The solution is quite stable, however, it's not as stable as Cisco. Generally, there are no bugs or glitches and it doesn't crash or freeze. 

The solution is scalable. It's very widely used in Iraq. Around 80% of people here use Ubiquiti.

We do the maintenance and support, but I haven't called them directly. I haven't even called the leading supplier directly. If I have problem, I access the forums, and they tend to publish a solution that can solve the issue.

We've also used Cisco. When you go for wireless systems, typically you look at Cisco, however, it's expensive. If you can't afford Cisco, you might look instead at Ubiquiti or Netgear. 

I've also used Ruckus in the past. 

The initial setup is quite simple. It's not too complex. 

The deployment time depends on the device. For the Mesh system, each access point will take around one to two minutes. It will auto-set the device once it's connected to the network. Generally, it's pretty quick, however, if you have a bigger environment, it takes longer.

The amount of technical staff needed to maintain the solution depends on the size of the company using it. For example, if you have a hotel with around 50 wifi access points, you need around two to three people to maintain it monthly.

The solution can be handled in-house. We did it ourselves. Anyone with networking experience can handle the implementation. 

I have yet to witness an ROI. 

There is no licensing cost. Once you purchase the hardware, you just use the product. It doesn't cost any more than that. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten. 

We primarily use the solution for guests. It's a guest network, mainly for mobile devices, however, there's not any specific or technical use for it beyond that.

The price of the solution is excellent. It's not too expensive. 

The initial setup is pretty straightforward.

The solution is stable.

It can scale well.

It's an excellent option for small businesses.

The external devices, the outdoor devices, are not so rugged. For example, for the weather that we have here in Florida, it doesn't hold up well even though it is supposed to be designed for outdoor use. The cover is not generally strong enough to support the extreme temperatures in Florida. That is one thing that I know that some customers have some problems with.

There is only a one-year warranty on the solution and you cannot actually extend it. It would be ideal if it could be longer or extended if possible.

I've been using the solution for the last eight years. It's been a long time now. 

The solution is very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product can scale well. There's no problem with that. They work like Meraki and the device acts just make a mesh.

We have ten people in the organization that use the solution. 

The technical support is really good. One of the things that they have is a one-year warranty. However, you can't extend it. That is something that they should improve.

We have been using many solutions. We have used SonicPoint in the past and some Linksys options. We added Ubiquiti as we wanted the possibility to add on new devices within the same network and centralize all the devices under the same monitoring solution, under the same console.

We also have experience with Aruba and Meraki.

The solution is very straightforward. It's not overly complex or difficult. We didn't have trouble with the implementation process. 

The deployment only takes a few hours. 

This is occasional maintenance that needs to be performed, however, I don't know how often this activity is performed. We do have one of the technicians here that can work with the product in case of any problems. It's not one specific person; it's just one of the technicians. We have some IT specialists and some of them work in the role of support. We have a network engineer, however, the solution that we have here is quite simple. It's not rocket science to see what is happening with the access point. It's pretty low maintenance as a solution in general and is easy to manage.

We did not use an integrator or consultant. We handled everything in-house.

The solution is very reasonably priced. We like the pricing they offer. There's a good balance between quality and price, as it's not that the product is cheap and bad. In this case, it's a good product at a good price.

The product is around $300 or $400 depending on the device. It's a one-time fee. There aren't ongoing licensing costs.

We're customers and end-users.

We are using the latest version of the solution. We just updated it.

This is a solution for small businesses. It's not so complex. For an enterprise solution, we always recommend Meraki or Aruba. Our first option is Meraki. If the customer requests a more affordable solution, we recommend Aruba. If it's a small business that doesn't have a budget, we obviously recommend Ubiquiti, however, it's not our first option.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten. 

The price and quality are really good. I'm not an expert in this product, however, from what I have witnessed, it works really well. It's just that you can't extend the warranty more than one year, and to have a product where you can't extend the warranty, it doesn't feel like you have much part support.

We use it mostly for our office network.

It helps the employees in doing more work. While moving from one place to another, especially for the meetings, it is really important to have a reliable and stable internet connection. Ubiquiti gives them a comfortable feeling while working in the office.

I like the fact that you can set it up like a wireless connection. Previously, we used to connect from one SSID to another. When we started using Ubiquiti, everyone was so happy because even if they moved from one place or another, say from the pantry to a meeting room, they didn't need to connect manually to another SSID. This is one of the features that I really like about it. It is doing a great job.

It offers a free controller that you can use to see if the devices are connected or not and if they are up or down.

There should be an easier way to contact the support. If we need to do something on it, it will be easier and faster if there is a support number to call. Currently, their support is mostly through email or chat. If there is a hotline that you can call directly, that would be good. It will really help a lot. They should also include more after-sales support.

They can maybe also provide more details on what's happening with the network.

I have been using this solution since 2013. That's roughly eight years.

It is really stable. We've been using it for the past eight years, and so far, everyone is loving it. We have no complaints. Now, all our offices use Ubiquiti, which proves how stable it is.

It is pretty scalable. It is easy to scale. Whenever we need more access points, it is easy to set it up. 

We have roughly 200 users with mixed roles. We have engineering, finance, HR, customer service, and CEO. In terms of increasing its usage, we just upgraded last year. We are in a good position right now. If our company expands, we might add or upgrade our network.

Currently, their support is mostly through email or chat. It would be good and helpful if there is a hotline that you can call directly. They should have direct contact numbers just like other enterprise companies. For example, Cisco provides a dedicated person with whom you can speak. 

It is pretty straightforward. Even non-technical people can set it up by following the videos on YouTube.

I like the fact that it offers enterprise features at a cheap price. If you compare it with Cisco, it has most of the features that Cisco has been offering but at a lesser price. I am satisfied with its price.

We did evaluate other products. One of the reasons why we chose Ubiquiti was its pricing and licensing. For other enterprise brands, you need to pay on a yearly basis. The controller has a cost as well. With Ubiquiti, we got enterprise features for a cheaper price. It was more than enough.

I would recommend this solution to others. You can never go wrong with Ubiquiti because it is already proven and tested, and there is no need to do POC on it.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless a nine out of ten.

We are a solution provider and this is one of the wireless solutions that we set up for my clients.

Normally, we do office wireless solutions. I've done one or two home wireless solutions for people that can afford Ubiquity products. Mostly, we've implemented Ubiquity in warehouses. I've also installed it in a medical scenario and in a restaurant solution.

One of the nice features is the backup version control.

The Cloud Key is used for the adoption process, which provides a single login control solution for your switching. Nobody can just get onto your switches, or onto your wireless units. This is a nice solution from a security perspective.

When it comes to setting it up, this is one of the fastest solutions out there. It has an adoption set up, where you set up your switches, connect your APs to see the switches, and from there it detects your system. It actually tells you what it detects from the network and then you adopt that. Whether it is another switch or another Ubiquity product, it will adopt it. Obviously, it only works with other Ubiquity products.

When it comes to accessing the system, when you don't have a Cloud Key then it can sometimes be frustrating and irritating. On a cloud system, it is easy to recover passwords, but without the cloud solution, it can get tricky sometimes. They don't force you to buy the cloud key, but it can be frustrating to use without it.

Ubiquity is not recognized for providing layered network solutions.

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.

This solution is very stable. Ubiquity is probably one of the most solid wireless solutions out there. I have set up their long-range, LR, where we've been two or three in a building or several buildings. I can't fault their stability at all.

This is a very scalable solution. You can put in a bigger switch or change other components. No matter what you want to do, it's very scalable.

Ubiquity does not recognize somebody who supplies legacy switching. It declares mostly layer two. It is scalable to that level, but I think in most cases, if somebody is looking for a layered solution then they're going to go to a dedicated layer specialist like Alcatel-Lucent, Cisco, or HPE.

We have approximately one hundred and fifty to two hundred end-users for this solution between different companies.

The technical support for this solution is very good. Even contacting support from South Africa, it only took me an hour to resolve my issue. I had one of Ubiquity's technical support people online. I had follow-up emails from them afterward because they wanted to make one hundred percent sure that my system was running.

In terms of waiting, the times were not longer than I had averaged with places like Microsoft or NETGEAR. In fact, Microsoft support could be hours later. This solution has actually been quicker than most of the other products.

Since I started my company, I have been using Ubiquity.

This solution is easy to install, but it's a premium product so not everybody knows how to install it, compared to the entry-level ones. If you set up a NETGEAR or a TP-Link or one of these, they are very similar. The adoption process with Ubiquity becomes too difficult if you don't know the setup scenario and without using Cloud solutions.

Generally, the initial setup is straightforward if you're connecting Ubiquity to Ubiquity and you've used components that are all theirs. If you don't understand the product and you try to say, for instance, put Ubiquity in with some legacy APs, then it's difficult.

Most laymen can set up a Ubiquity-only system from scratch.

Ubiquity is by no means the most expensive wireless solution out there. 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). Cisco will also have monthly or yearly licensing fees on their products.

This solution is definitely cheaper than Cisco and less expensive than HPE in a lot of instances. They are more expensive in most cases than what NETGEAR is, but not by far. Aruba is also more expensive than Ubiquity.

There are no licensing fees that I know of. I have never had to pay a monthly fee or anything like that with a Ubiquity product.

You have to keep your switches up to date in order to support all of your wireless components. Normally, all of the firmware is the latest version.

When it comes to home solutions, people tend to shy away from Ubiquity. They look at products like TP-Link or Tenda, which are entry-level products. These products are good, but they are aimed at the home market. They're aimed at being straightforward plug-and-play, without any real security worries. Ubiquity is more premium, which is why it is more corporate or for more experienced customers.

While this product is good for small businesses, I would say that you can integrate it into an enterprise solution as well. It's a solid enough product that it will work in an enterprise environment without a problem.

This is definitely a very good product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We have Ubiquiti Wireless units in retirement communities, specifically in outdoor parks and then in each home. We also have them for guest access in the hotels, so throughout the building, in the rooms, in the hallways, and in the public areas. 

We replaced probably eight or 10-year-old technology for our clients with Ubiquiti Wireless, so it has made their internet connection work much better, with faster throughput, and given them more bandwidth.

What I find the most valuable is that all of the equipment talks to each other, so we can manage it from one single interface. I also find valuable the fact that the access points mesh together to provide redundancy in addition to the wired connectivity.

The network setup could be a little easier and more straightforward.

I have worked with Ubiquiti Wireless for probably three to four years. 

Ubiquiti Wireless is very scalable. I don't know that there's a limit to scalability. We just add more data switches to power more access points. We haven't come across a situation where it can't handle the Ubiquiti equipment.

It's mostly used by guests or property owners. Management accesses the wireless network as well, but they don't have any role in managing it or maintaining it. We do all that. So, it's really just internet access for guests and homeowners.

The people doing the installation are basically just connecting the wires to the access points and mounting the access points. I think we had two installers and then one engineer that's just managing everything; they're logged into the interface and adopting the access points and setting up the network control.

No tech support is perfect, but their response time could be better. However, they are very knowledgeable once they start working on any technical issue that we are having.

Positive

We did not previously use anything else. When we started with these opportunities, we evaluated other products, and this had the best price and performance. So, we went with this from day one.

We are certified and took Ubiquiti's training, which was a five-day training class. Deployment is fairly straightforward for us thanks to the training that we have had.

We did our deployment in-house. Everything's been solid since we installed it. No issues with the equipment.

There are no licensing fees. 

That is not a question I can answer. My engineer did most of that legwork. 

The advice I would give to others looking into implementing this product is this: go get trained and receive their certification first. You can use the product without training but to implement it, you've got to know where and which access points and which RF technology is involved.

On a scale of one to 10, with one as the worst and 10 as the best, I would give Ubiquiti Wireless an eight. 

We use the product for site-to-site connectivity.

I'm using wireless radios. There are features like wireless bridging that are quite useful. We're using wireless bridging. That's the primary purpose as to why we have the equipment. 

They are reliable in terms of wireless connectivity.

The initial setup is easy.

The availability could be better. Currently, the equipment is always out of stock due to the amount they're pricing. It's quite cheap, so people want to buy it. Their stock is a bit low compared to others, making it difficult to purchase.

I've been using the solution for ten years.

The stability is very good. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. We find it reliable. 

In terms of scalability, I cannot say at this time how it is. If it is a very small one, it may have one or two points only. We only have maybe three to four antennas. That's not very much. I cannot grade scalability with such a small deployment.

We have 20 users at a maximum on this product. They are all in operations. The engineering department doesn't use it that much.

In the advent of fiber, it's unlikely we will increase usage. 

I don't find technical support very useful. I usually use forums or community support. I haven't tried to call technical support in the past.

You just need to read the manual. For some concerns that are not seen in the manual, I go to the forums. The only time I would like to go to support is if there is a feature maybe that doesn't exist in the system. Currently, I am not into those things, so I'm only currently using the current features of their package.

I have Ubiquiti Wireless, MikroTik Wireless, and MikroTik Wired.

The only brand we have considered for this particular purpose was Ubiquiti since all others are very expensive brands. For our use case, we cannot afford to implement expensive antennas as it's difficult to afford for purchasing,

The initial setup is easy. The complete deployment took one week. 

We have three people involved in the deployment and maintenance. 

I noted an ROI after five years.

You can use the equipment for five years without any problems before you need to replace anything. Or, if an incident occurs that you can't control - like calamities or lightning strikes that really damage the dish. That's the only time you have to have problems. They last a long period of time. Your return investment is good for the price they give.

The pricing is very, very reasonable. It was quite cheap. We buy them outright. There is no licensing. 

Support is not included with that, as the equipment itself is already usable as it is.

I was looking into Cambium. I was trying to see how much the difference in prices were. Since it was a very big jump in price, I know I could not justify its purchase for the capacity that we only have.

We use a mixture of versions. We're constantly upgrading, so there is some old equipment and new equipment.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

We use it to set up wireless WANs ranging from a single access point in a small business to 100 apartments in an accommodation complex.

The solution offers us good situational awareness by providing information on user activity, signal strength, and all the data that you need to manage the system and understand issues. 

The strength of the routers could be improved. When it comes to serious routing, the solution doesn't measure up to the big guys like Juniper and Cisco, but we don't expect it to.

I have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for three years. 

The stability isn't perfect, but that's the nature of a leading edge technology and you learn through working with it.

We've run into a few limitations in what we call large accommodation environments where we've got about 100 wireless devices, trying to do things with USG type routers, onsite controllers, where they run out of capacity. This could have been our technicians making incorrect estimates of what was possible, but we're having to put in small local service to do that function. It would be preferable to have everything occurring in the core router. When that happens, the core device is overloaded and it's difficult to access it remotely. That's been one of the issues we've run into as we've pushed the limit on the number of devices on a single site.
We maintain over 1,000, probably 2,000 devices with just three people.

I can't comment on that as we haven't had to use it much at all.  

I don't do the setup personally, but I can see that once you understand how to roll the solution out, the process is relatively straightforward. Being able to adopt the device, see it on the management system and configure it, are all easy to implement.
Complexity also depends on what you're implementing. Setting everything up in the lab prior to on-site deployment means that you can complete the installation in less than an hour, which makes it look efficient and professional. If adjustments need to be made later it can all be done remotely, this is one of the benefits of cloud management and remote access equipment. 

We have absolutely seen a return on our investment.

We don't have any licensing costs in our use-case. It's low cost, perhaps not the leading edge in the industry, but for the type of industry we work in, the cost suits us perfectly. It's aggressive on price so we can make a margin deploying it, and we can make money managing it for our clients. 

We are a virtual organization with a number of people working from home and coming together to provide solutions.
Most of the equipment switches, wireless equipment cameras etc. work pretty well.
Once everything is up and running, the solution doesn't need much attention at all. That's why we like it. We want to run an efficient business and scale the business well, and not have to hire too many people to do the job. That's working out very well.