We performed a comparison between Ekahau Site Survey and RedSeal based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out what your peers are saying about Ekahau, NetAlly, iBwave and others in Network Modeling and Simulation."The ability to perform dual-band spectrum analysis while conducting the standard WiFi site survey is a tremendous time saver."
"Ekahau lets you create heat maps without doing the initial survey. It makes the task easier."
"I like that our users can send us a floor map. Sometimes it's not feasible to travel to another country where the users are based. So, the floor map is very useful. It's a fantastic product."
"We reviewed the maps as a team and determined if any changes needed to be made or if we could just replace APs as they are. We got into this by upgrading our access points to Meraki, and we wanted to make sure that we weren't leaving trouble behind us as we were doing it."
"The planning feature is useful because it's very affordable."
"The solution is user-friendly and it provides a good output that can be measured, and I can describe and pinpoint any inaccuracy shortfalls."
"We are satisfied with the way this product is working."
"Ekahau Site Survey is scalable."
"The most valuable features are network mapping and configuration."
"This is the only solution in the world that gives you a digital resilience score."
"RedSeal integrates the network and gives us a visual or graphical overview of our network. If an organization is geographically dispersed, for instance, with one office in Canada and one office in the Philippines, the whole network, including all devices, is integrated into RedSeal, and you can see from where the traffic is going in and out."
"Ekahau Site Survey is an expensive solution, and its pricing should be improved."
"We were actually able to recover some access points in some areas that were over saturated. So I I can leave at least two areas where we probably had twice as many access points as we needed to. So we actually redesigned it and pulled some of those access points where I don't know that there was any proper planning done when they were initially deployed. It was before my time, but it just seemed way over saturated, and they were all beaten on each other. So Site wasn't helping. It was probably hurting, and we saved equipment that we could then deploy somewhere else. This can be improved."
"Its migration and visualization features need improvement."
"The report generation has room for improvement and is missing small details."
"Ekahau would benefit by making improvements to lag time."
"I find the power button hard to access with just one hand."
"It would be better if it provided clear visibility. It would be better if it accommodated large physical sites like a warehouse with a ceiling height of more than twelve to fifteen feet. In such situations, we were unable to provide better coverage."
"In all of our buildings, whenever we deploy wireless access points, we also have to deploy wireless intrusion detections. The Ekahau Site Survey tool doesn't allow us to differentiate between the access point and the intrusion detection device. That's because they're the same devices, but they're configured differently for the type of usage. That's one area that I would ask them to improve. They should allow the identification of access points versus wireless intrusion detection."
"The dashboard should be improved to make correlating data easier to do."
"One of the areas of concern is the GUI. It is important to our customers that the GUI looks beautiful. It's a Java Client, so you have a Java dependency."
"Sometimes, it required us to refresh the configuration. When we integrated any of the configurations into the device, sometimes, it could not detect the exact picture of that device. So, we had to reset the device to see that if it was giving true-positive results or false-positive results. In some cases, we were not able to get true-positive results. There was some kind of bug in that version. Its interface is not user-friendly and needs to be improved. It takes time to understand the interface and various options. Skybox has quite a user-friendly interface. They could provide a feature for compliance audit policy if it is already not there. A compliance audit policy ensures that all configurations are based on the best practices standards, such as CIS benchmarks standard or other similar standards. It provides visibility about whether your device configuration is based on best practices or not. Usually, such a feature is provided by other solutions such as Meteor or Tenable Nessus."
Earn 20 points
Ekahau Site Survey is ranked 1st in Network Modeling and Simulation with 31 reviews while RedSeal is ranked 21st in Risk-Based Vulnerability Management. Ekahau Site Survey is rated 8.8, while RedSeal is rated 8.2. The top reviewer of Ekahau Site Survey writes "Valuable troubleshooting tools and easy to scale, but outdated documentation, issues with stability, and lacks differentiated survey modes". On the other hand, the top reviewer of RedSeal writes "Provides a graphical overview of our network and is easy to deploy, but needs a user-friendly interface and a feature for compliance audit policy". Ekahau Site Survey is most compared with AirMagnet Survey, iBwave Wi-Fi and Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, whereas RedSeal is most compared with AlgoSec, Skybox Security Suite, FireMon Security Manager, Darktrace and iBwave Wi-Fi.
We monitor all Network Modeling and Simulation 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.
