Ubiquiti Wireless Reviews

We deployed it alongside Linksys. The way I'm using it is the way I have used Linksys.

We can use it for WLAN deployments and outdoor wireless connectivity. We can use it for wireless hotspots - the long range type.

The management they have the UniFi Controller allows you to manage everything including access from the entrance location from the server.

The solution is stable.

We have found the product to be scalable.

Its server is easy to use.  

The product is easy to install.

How easy it is to install depends on the knowledge base of the person doing it. It can get a bit technical.

I would prefer if the solution offered more integration capabilities. 

We've used the solution for more than four years at this point. It's been a while.

The solution has been stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

The scalability is very good. If a company needs to expand it, it can do so.

I've never contacted technical support. I wouldn't be able to comment on how helpful or responsive they are. 

We use the solution alongside Linksys. We later migrated to UniFi in one of our offices.

The product is easy to install, however, it's technical. You need to have a technical person involved, and if you do it will be an easy installation. 

You buy the solution outright. However, I cannot speak to the exact pricing. 

I'd rate the solution at a ten out of ten. I've found the solution to be very good overall.

I would recommend the solution to other users and companies. 

We are a system integrator and this is one of the solutions that we provide to our customers.

This solution is used for an on-premises WiFi access point.

The indoor WiFi connection works well.

Some of our customers have reported problems with their outdoor WiFi connections.

We have been using this solution for about five years.

That stability of this solution is ok.

This solution is easy to set up.

We provide Professional Services for our customers, which includes deployment.

The price of this solution is ok.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use case is for wireless networking but we've done more work on the industrial side. I've done work in medical, construction, and business corporates. There are quite a couple of corporate installations as well, but mostly in warehousing and that kind of thing.

Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up. If you do all the proper working parameters for it, it's extremely easy to set up. It's got something called "adoption," so you connect all of your switches and your APs, give them power, and then you actually open the software. You log into the switch, open the software and adopt the APs. The switch adopts, the AP picks up what it is and what it's doing, gives you diagnostics on it, and it's a 10 or 15 minute process. You can turn around, connect all these switches up, switch the switch on and it tells you those switches are there and it adopts the switches.

With MikroTik for instance, you have a lot of setup protocols to do. If you're not a MikroTik engineer, a MikroTik solution is very difficult to set up. If you're not a NETGEAR engineer, or you're not somebody that knows NETGEAR, NETGEAR is very difficult to set up initially if you don't know the product. Whereas something like Ubiquiti, you literally just switch it on, you adopt the APs, and that's it. There's a couple of parameters you need set, so you obviously have to have a networking background to do it but just from a setup perspective, it's one of the easiest systems that I've ever set up.

Obviously Ubiquiti wants to work with Ubiquiti. So if you are setting up any other third party product or any other different product, it sometimes can be a bit difficult. With Ubiquiti, you need to set up because you can adopt the product and that's it, where if it's not a Ubiquiti product it can sometimes be a difficult setup. It also depends on your network knowledge but it can be a difficult set up sometimes.

For instance, not that you ever really do this, but if I've got somebody that comes to me and wants to go with UniFi as a switching solution but they have an existing Aruba wireless installation, you really need to know what you're doing to set up that kind of solution on Ubiquiti, on the switching. There's another setup protocol you can get by and it will definitely work. But there might be a different setup protocol these guys can actually look at to make that setup scenario a little bit easier.

I have been using Ubiquiti for four years. 

It is very stable. Out of all my Ubiquiti installations I have not had to go back to one of them for product failure. I've never had a Ubiquiti or UniFi switch fail on me. Ever. 

It is very scalable. On a scale of a point, it depends on who you talk to, if you're going to talk to a hardened IT manager that has to look at security and anything like that, they're going to look at a layer three switch provider. It depends if you're doing any kind of financial institution. It depends on what you build as your backbone. However, from a scalability point of view, I think they're extremely scalable.

I've spoken to guys that run very big corporate networks, like Ford company for instance. Ford uses Ubiquiti as their backbone, so they're happy with the security and they're happy with the fact that it's only a layer two switch. Where somebody like a standard bank would not look at Ubiquiti because it only goes up to layer two capability. They'll put a layer three backbone in but they might use Ubiquiti's APs on that layer two backbone. It comes down to a matter of opinion. I have had other guys say to me that layer two is more than enough because of the way they've set up their network. It's a very interesting question but to be short, it is very scalable.

Everybody starts up- in the beginning, only small companies adopt it and then people slowly but surely will adopt it in a department or whatever else. But my point of view is that I've seen big companies, like Ford motor company use Ubiquiti to a large extent. We are actually about to embark on a very big network setup that's going to go to multiple countries. And we're definitely going to be using Ubiquiti as my wireless connection of choice.

I'm very very happy to do it like that. We've done a lot of research on it and I've still got people that have to do the final go-ahead on it. But eventually, at the end of the day, the choice is ours.

We don't need to do a lot of maintenance. It depends on the nodes. The nice thing about it is that most networks nowadays including Ubiquiti, depending on how your network is set up, all your access points can literally be monitored from a single point. I can have a thousand access points running and I can monitor them from a single point as long as my network is connected and on how your infrastructure is built. I  have one network engineer monitor my wireless for multiple levels of my company. 

I don't need a lot of people. When it comes to installation and whatever, you need a normal fateful installation team, it's not any more difficult or any easier than most APs to install. It comes down to normal network rules in what you do. You don't need so many network engineers to control different aspects of the network. Nowadays you need somebody to look after security, you need somebody to look after networking, you need somebody to look after software, you need somebody to look after hardware. At the moment the thing that's the most intense is desktop support and desktop maintenance. That's the thing that's the most intense. And thanks to Coronavirus, I think the adoption of remote monitoring, remote support and everything like that has just exponentially grown. Many more people are doing remote support. I think the world is very much going to be moving a lot in that direction over then the next two or three months.

Their technical support is very organized, very well run, and very informative. I have had the Ubiquiti country manager and his support team follow up with me up to a month after I reported a fault to find out if my fault has been resolved. The Ubiquiti support was brilliant.

I've had instances where the setup has taken 10 to 15 minutes depending on how big the install is and depending on how complex it is but sometimes an adoption like that can maybe take half an hour.

My first point of advice is, don't get into it blindly. Although, it's easy to set up, don't get into it blindly. Do a little bit of research on the product before you first open the box because it is not like other products in the sense that it's very easy to set up, but you still have to have a bit of savvy around it. There's no other product in the world that I know of that does the whole adoption setup and control set up the way Ubiquiti does. Other products handle things differently, NETGEAR does it differently. A bit of advice is, go and look at how the adoption process on the switches work and how easy the switches are to set up and learn a couple of the tricks and that's about it.

I would rate Ubiquiti a nine out of ten. 

On-premises

We use the solution for individuals that need access to the office network. This solution allows them to be connected to their mobile, desktop, laptops, and tablets, or any other kind of internal information which is being sent to the cloud. 

I have found the most valuable features to be how user-friendly it is and how simple it is to do the configurations.

This solution should be more robust when it comes to connectivity and improve wireless technology.

I have been using the solution for one year.

I have found the solution to be stable.

The solution is scalable. We have 100 people using the solution in my organization.

The technical support is good.

I have been using Aruba solutions in the past and they have some advantages to this one. Aruba is more prudent and robust overall. However, in Aruba, you have to configure it a lot with many details.

I did the deployment myself.

The price has been fair for what I have been using it for. There is no license for this solution.

I would recommend this solution to others. However, if you have the extra budget I would select Aruba instead.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless an eight out of ten.

On-premises

We use the solution for big houses and sometimes in hotels.

This solution has helped my organization a little bit.

Having dual-band is important. Having compatibility with very old equipment on certain frequencies, for example on 2.4 and 5.8. On the 2.4 frequency, there are a lot of things in the house that uses it, sometimes old TVs cannot connect to the new technologies but they work fine with this solution.

I would like to see more cloud features that some of the other competitors such as Cisco Meraki have that are very useful.

In an upcoming release, I would like to see faster updates and advancements. 

Cisco product can show you all the traffic on the cloud, what kind of traffic, who is connected, and who disconnected. They have a lot of statistics, all the Mac addresses and IPs. You can see a lot of information. Additionally, It is very easy to find some specific equipment. For example, what port is connected and what others do not. If you also put some switches from Meraki, you also will have a lot more features, plenty of more. That is why it is expensive but it's the best definitely. This solution should take some of the beneficial features from those two solutions I mentioned and upgrade.

I have used the solution in the past 12 months.

When we upgrade the access points to the newest version, it does not work all the time, when this occurs we need to roll back the firmware.

The solution is scalable. The eight-person IT department is using the solution as well as everybody else because they use wifi, approximately 32 employees.

The customer support is satisfactory. Sometimes the support would rather the customer use the technical chats or forums that they have. They do not always take the call.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless customers support an eight out of ten.

We have used previously Cisco, IronNet, and Ruckus. I have found Ruckus to be the best.

Sometimes when you are trying to set up the access points it comes with old firmware which makes it have problems when setting it up on the controller. It can be very difficult. However, if the firmware is not too old it will work fine. 

If you do not have a big budget, you can use Ubiquiti, it is cost-effective.

Those wanting to purchase solutions try and balance between the price and features, with this solution it is very cheap in comparison with Cisco and Ruckus. For example, if you are looking for houses best suited, the high-end houses are a good fit. For companies, they might have a larger budget to invest in more expensive equipment. Ubiquiti for houses is more than enough.

I rate Ubiquiti Wireless a seven out of ten.

On-premises

We are a solution provider and Ubiquiti is one of the wireless products that we implement for our customers. We also implement wired products, such as switches and gateways.

We primarily used this product for building industrial networks in production and manufacturing companies, especially warehouses. This includes offices, as well.

The most valuable feature is the ease of setup.

The control system can be improved by making it easier. You should be able to install it on Linux, by default. It should be delivered with this option, rather than having to rely on something by a third-party.

I have been working with this product for close to ten years.

This is a stable solution.

Ubiquity Wireless is scalable.

There are only 22 people in my organization that use this product but within our installation base, there are thousands of users.

We have no objections and nothing to complain about with their technical support. Everything is fine.

We commonly use a couple of different products including those by Cisco and DrayTek. The choice of model depends on the size of the organization.

The initial setup is very easy. The length of time required depends on how large the installation is. Some deployments are as little as one day, whereas others can take a month to complete.

I was the architect of this solution and I used other companies to complete the installation and deployment. Our customers maintain this product themselves, as they have their own IT departments.

We may increase our installation base for Ubiquity Wireless. However, I want to have an extended portfolio with all of the other products also available.

Overall, this is a product that I recommend.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

On-premises

Range, Reliability, Price

Enables desktop network wide management with minimal learning curve.

End Point data collection. Aggregated (single screen) multi endpoint bandwidth monitor would be a big help. To see which endpoints are consuming most bandwidth in real time.

3 Years. The products I use are airMax, EdgeMax and airVision.

Non whatsoever

Engenius

Adequate

Straightforward

In house

Excellent!

Under $15k setup costs. Approx 50 man days per annum maintenance.

Get training first before deploying. I didn't (due to location) and wish I could have. Learning by doing is not the best way of doing things. However, once up the curve of this equipment is very straightforward to deploy.

We use this solution as wifi wireless points and controllers.

I like the simplicity, the ease of use. 

Occasionally the upgraded firmware causes errors. When they update the interface some features disappear.

There are some outstanding security flaws.

We had a security incident that forced us to re-evaluate our security posture, when we did, we were corporate mandated to stop using it.

I have been working with Ubiquiti Wireless for eight years.

The stability is very good.

Ubiquiti Wireless scales very well.

It's a cost-effective solution.

This solution is better suited for small to medium-sized businesses.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless a seven out of ten.