We performed a comparison between Aruba Wireless and Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless LAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."ClearPass is a unique product that contains multiple solutions like BYOD, Guest, NAC, AAA, UEBA, etc. There is also quick support from Aruba TAC."
"It has an aesthetically pleasing GUI for configuration."
"Ability for a student or teacher to be able to roam freely from classroom to classroom, no matter the floor, without dropping a signal."
"The initial setup is straightforward. Configure one IAP and all the rest self-configure to that one."
"It helps the user to have a better vision of what is happening in their network."
"The most valuable feature in this product would be the stability. You build it, install it, and it’s good to go, with no further tweaks needed unless adding or replacing APs."
"Overall, it's a very strong solution."
"The feature I found most valuable to customers in Aruba Wireless is not a technical feature. It's more of its image, trademark, or brand as the product is very well-known in the market, and that's a good point to offer to customers. My customers just ask about the basic features of the product, and usually, when asking about Aruba products, customers don't pay too much attention to any specific feature as long as the product is solid and sure, and that you can change or modify it, as what you can get from Aruba Wireless."
"The solution is stable."
"The most useful feature of Juniper Wireless AP is the reporting Marvis."
"With Mist, every Wednesday they roll out new features."
"You can easily monitor, manage, and cover all your IT equipment."
"Overall, we've been very pleased with the performance."
"In terms of reporting, in terms of all the user reports, it's very rich."
"The solution is very secure."
"The AI capabilities of Mist Wireless are superior to other OEMs."
"Aruba needs to be more competitive with newer products. Their legacy makes that more difficult for them."
"Because it's cloud-based, it takes time for the floor maps and the heat map to load."
"The stability and management could be improved."
"The logging is hard to read when troubleshooting issues."
"The dashboards that represent the network access control in Aruba Wireless could improve."
"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."
"Every month Aruba has new firmware. I don't know if it's good or bad but it's not good in terms of production. We can't upgrade our firmware every month, especially an enterprise company, because if we upgrade our firmware based on the latest firmware that Aruba has, that firmware is not stable. They're not 100 percent sure about it."
"The solution is now taking eight to 12 months to deliver the product."
"They should include SD-WAN features to it."
"If you want to do more specific stuff, it's a bit limited."
"Improvement is needed in the user-friendliness of Juniper Mist, particularly in enhancing the interaction with AI features."
"The price could be better."
"The pricing is very high in the Indian market."
"Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points’ support services need improvement."
"The product should include adaptive Wi-Fi to show a more accurate location."
"Enrolling into the tool is a tedious process."
More Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points Pricing and Cost Advice →
Aruba Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless LAN with 138 reviews while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is ranked 10th in Wireless LAN with 16 reviews. Aruba Wireless is rated 8.4, while Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is rated 8.8. The top reviewer of Aruba Wireless writes "The portal for centralized management and virtual controller for APs are very valuable". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points writes "Offers good performance, good solution and smooth implementation ". Aruba Wireless is most compared with Cisco Wireless, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Huawei Wireless, whereas Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points is most compared with Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Ruckus Wireless, Cisco Wireless, Ubiquiti WLAN and Mist AI and Cloud. See our Aruba Wireless vs. Juniper Mist Wireless Access Points report.
See our list of best Wireless LAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless LAN 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.