We performed a comparison between Fortinet FortiExtender and Ubiquiti Wireless based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Wireless WAN solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Management can be carried out from a central point."
"For me, the best feature of Fortinet FortiExtender is its integration with an external solution such as a 5G LTE broadband modem, wired modem, and cellular network. I also like that the product can be integrated into one device or a unified device, and that is one of its best features because it allows you to manage and centralize the control of every device."
"We appreciate that this solution can be used as an active secondary link as well as a backup."
"The most valuable feature will be that it works."
"You don't need to have two different vendors to interoperate and get into comparability issues or inter-operability issues."
"The initial setup was was just beautiful. It was straightforward."
"The product is easy to use and easy to integrate."
"The solution is extremely user-friendly."
"This access point provides internet to every lab on campus, including the computer laboratory"
"Their hardware is very good."
"The main strength of Ubiquiti Wireless is the ease of use it provides to users."
"Overall, it's a straightforward solution."
"Ubiquiti Wireless is easy to use, it's stable and flexible, and the performance is great. It is scalable as well."
"They are reliable in terms of wireless connectivity."
"Having dual-band is important. Having compatibility with very old equipment on certain frequencies, for example on 2.4 and 5.8."
"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."
"The engineering of the solution has some negative points, especially in terms of troubleshooting. It's difficult to troubleshoot when we have a problem. It's not like other products like Cisco or Palo Alto which make troubleshooting much easier."
"I would like to see them make it smaller in the next release so that it has a smaller footprint for mobile clients."
"What most of my clients are telling me is the price is a problem."
"We would like to see some improvement in the price for 5G models, as they are currently very expensive."
"Though Fortinet FortiExtender has some security features, the product could still be improved by adding features similar to those in FortiGuard, such as antivirus, intrusion, prevention, and detection, as well as web filtering features. The product is also not as user-friendly, so that's another area for improvement. In the FortiGate UTM solution of Fortinet, there's software-defined or SD-WAN, and in the next release of Fortinet FortiExtender, I'd like to see SD-WAN embedded in the product. Most of the communication in Fortinet FortiExtender is related to WAN and Edge, so having an SD-WAN function in the product would be useful for integrating and controlling WAN communication."
"There is a huge downside because we need to remove and insert the SIM to get it working."
"The support could be faster and more responsive."
"The solution would be a lot better if it was a little bit more intuitive. Additionally, the help menu would be a lot better if it was easier to identify the items that I was looking for. I find the graphical interface a little bit difficult to navigate. And I find the font that is used on the HTML interface not conducive to being able to be read in low light situations."
"This might not be the best solution for a very large organization."
"Better security is important because we need to have some degree of control over who is connected and how we can restrict the level of connectivity."
"We use different models of the solution but in some cases, the security could improve in the adaptive portal, be a little more robust, and easier to use."
"After upgrades to the interface, some features disappear."
"The technical support services need improvement."
"The solution has very good product lines. However, it feels like some models overlap. For example, a new model is announced after three months, and another new model is announced shortly after. So, the release cycle feels too short, and some features overlap. Overall, the products are very good and reliable."
"We'd like the solution to be more stable and have fewer firmware upgrades."
"Its stability could be better."
Fortinet FortiExtender is ranked 6th in Wireless WAN with 8 reviews while Ubiquiti Wireless is ranked 1st in Wireless WAN with 68 reviews. Fortinet FortiExtender is rated 8.2, while Ubiquiti Wireless is rated 8.0. The top reviewer of Fortinet FortiExtender writes "Seamless with excellent integration capabilities and flexibility". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Ubiquiti Wireless writes "It's cheap and easy to use but isn't suitable for large deployments or complex use cases ". Fortinet FortiExtender is most compared with Cisco Wireless WAN, whereas Ubiquiti Wireless is most compared with Ruckus Wireless WAN, Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN, Cambium Networks Wireless WAN, Aruba Wireless and ExtremeCloud IQ. See our Fortinet FortiExtender vs. Ubiquiti Wireless report.
See our list of best Wireless WAN vendors.
We monitor all Wireless WAN 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.