Aruba Instant Reviews

There are setups where instant switches will be present, mostly around two or three, and as part of the same setup, five to ten APs will be there; this setup needs to be implemented in one of the environments of our company's customers using Aruba Instant.

The customers of our organization might also have multiple PSKs and additional radius in their internet, so as part of the company, we need to integrate Aruba Instant accordingly, and especially for any personal SSID, it needs to operate through Aruba Instant. 

Aruba Instant is cloud-based, and thus, it improves wireless network performance on cloud platforms. The solution allows network monitoring through devices like mobiles and desktops, which is a feasible option. The tool also has Bluetooth settings so a user can deploy Aruba Instant through a serial number or the Bluetooth option. 

Aruba Instant allows users to monitor the number of connected clients and AP status in the network at any given time on the cloud dashboard. The aforementioned feature is highly beneficial for small and medium-sized businesses in the customer's environment. 

The wireless coverage provided by Aruba Instant should be increased. The APs are used heavily in a mid-scale business, so increasing the coverage can be beneficial. The traffic capacity of the solution can also be expanded including increase in the number of clients and radius.  

Aruba Instant can integrate a few features similar to ClearPass in future versions so that small businesses can grow and avoid the need to shift toward traditional APs. 

I have been using Aruba Instant for a year. 

I would rate the stability of the solution an eight out of ten. 

The tool provides scalability through enhanced performance, high speed functionality and Wi-Fi certification. Aruba Instant also supports Wi-Fi 6 standard and there is also a 25% data increase on AP22. The product also provides an improved throughput and the AP22 capacity has been increased with a maximum of active devices around 50 to 70. 

The product also consumes less power in comparison to other traditional solutions, so small businesses can highly benefit from it. I would rate the scalability of Aruba Instant an eight out of ten. 

I would rate the customer support as six out of ten. The support team is helpful, but when a major issue arises with the solution, there is a wide delay in response and resolution. In a few instances, professionals from our organization had to wait an hour to avail of support.

Sometimes, from customer support, it's communicated that the engineer is not available at their end, and there will be a delay of a couple of hours to get a hold of the individual. Once the engineer becomes available, the individual provides an ideal solution to the technical problems. 

Neutral

The solution can be easily deployed. I have personally deployed Aruba Instant for five to six customers of our organization and they are using it properly. There are about eight to ten engineers in the technical team for Aruba Instant in our organization. 

I would rate the pricing a seven out of ten. The product is competitively priced with other OEM solutions. 

I have used other similar solutions to Aruba Instant in my prior company. 

Aruba Instant provides security features including the latest protocols and Pre-shared Keys. The aforementioned keys are available in Aruba Instant with multiple PSK functionalities, including WPA2 and WPA3 so that authentications can be carried out. Aruba Instant also offers firewall features, for instance in the SSID the firewall can be configured to help clients determine what to use and what not. 

The solutions support WPA3 enterprise, which uses a 192-bit minimum security level suite. Aruba Instant also provides WPA2 PSK with password authentication. 

Aruba Instant supports AI-driven projects in our organization through automated insights, including details of what users are doing on the network, signal strength details, alerts, events and other AI Assist features. I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

Aruba Instant should also provide console access to the AP so that small businesses can receive assistance with troubleshooting. In few occasions, small businesses don't want a traditional AP because they have a limited capacity of only 50 to 60 users.

Small businesses thus prefer an instant one, to quickly power it on and use it. If small businesses want to authenticate through Clear Pass, then the authentication gets stuck and a complex process of operating through traditional AP needs to be followed. 

I like the Instant On switches and the AP22

For on-premises, I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. For on-prem, if I want to integrate two more controls, and I want to extend my network , and add a couple of access points that need to be integrated with my network, I have to do the configurations and all. So that will be each and every time, as and when the users expand, the Wi-Fi solution expands; I need to do the configuration settings on all other controllers.

There is room for improvement in scalability for the on-premises deployment model. 

I have been working with the solution for the past eight years. Currently, I work with the latest version of the solution.

The solution is highly stable. I rate it a perfect ten. 

The scalability of the solution is a perfect ten on the cloud. I have positioned it for enterprise, and I have also positioned it for medium and small businesses.

For on-premises, I would rate the scalability a seven out of ten. For on-prem, if I want to integrate two more controls, and I want to extend my network , and add a couple of access points that need to be integrated with my network, I have to do the configurations and all. So that will be each and every time, as and when the users expand, the Wi-Fi solution expands; I need to do the configuration settings on all other controllers. 

But if it is in the cloud, if it's on the cloud, I just need to add the control. I just need to add the MAC ID; that will be easy for us to extend it.

I would rate your experience with the initial setup a nine out of ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The deployment model also depends on the customer inputs. We usually prefer to go with Amazon Cloud if they already have an existing Azure. 

The deployment duration depends on the customer to the customer; it varies. It depends on the architecture, number of flows, number of access points, and users, too. Because it is based on the number of users, if the architecture is huge, it may take up to one month. Sometimes, it may finish in just two days. It depends on the users.

The ROI is visible. This product is a day-to-day requirement for the customers. Most of the customers will come up with their laptops or BYOD devices. All those things. So it's a mandatory thing for them to set up the network and to run their show.  

I would rate the pricing a five out of ten, where one is cheap and ten is expensive.

If a Small and Medium Business (SMB) customer wants a plug-and-play deployment, we recommend considering Aruba Instant.

Our company has about 25 access points, and they integrate Aruba Instant. We have authentication integrated with Windows in the main controller for each employee. We also have a guest net portal.

We like that we can assign our employees based on authentication over Windows in the main controller. We couldn't do that with Cisco, so we switched to Aruba for that feature. Other solutions have end of life for devices, but Aruba does not. Cisco becomes completely useless at the end of life.

There is an issue with flooding to the Aruba access point on the ports. The flooding comes from the file transfer, but the two hosts that do the file transfers are on wire, not a wireless connection. So it's strange that we can see that graphic on the access point. We still don't know what is causing the issue. It may be a setting in Aruba, but we don't know. So we are trying to resolve the issue first before contacting technical support.

We have been using this solution for about three years, and I believe we're using version 8.0.9.2. It is deployed on-premises.

Apart from some of the issues we are currently facing, the solution is stable, and we are satisfied.

It is a scalable solution, and we have about 120 users and clients connected to wireless daily and management of the networks are done within by company.

We have not contacted technical support before.

The initial setup was straightforward, and the deployment was completed in-house.

We have a return on investment.

We did not evaluate other solutions before choosing Aruba Instant. We attended a presentation by Aruba, spoke with some Aruba engineers and then decided to try the solution.

I rate this solution a nine out of ten, and I would recommend this solution to others.

I use Aruba Instant for Wireless LAN and CCTV solutions.

My organisation hasn’t noticed any cost reduction since implementing Aruba Instant. However, there has been a significant time reduction in pushing orders.

The simplicity of the dashboard is one of the most valuable features. It's easy to use, and manage and the security features are robust. We can block unauthorized connections and create secure SSIDs.

We have faced delay in customer support which has affected our business performance. So the customer support needs to be prompt in their responses. 

I have been using Aruba Instant for the past four years.

I would rate the stability a ten  out of ten, since it is very stable.

I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

The initial setup is very swift and easy. 

I would rate the pricing a six out of ten. 

We considered a lot of products before choosing Aruba Instant. We went ahead with Aruba Instant due to it being cheaper than Cisco and Fortinet.

Overall, I would rate the product an eight out of ten. 

The product is cost-effective. It is easy to use, manage, and implement. It can be installed with an app on the phone as well. It is built and designed for users who do not have the necessary skills to implement enterprise cloud networks.

The product could have more security features integrated into enterprise data. They could provide a centralized system to manage switches incorporated into multiple branches.

We have been using Aruba Instant for four years.

I rate the product’s stability a seven out of ten.

We can only incorporate about 27 IPs and switches in a particular bandwidth. It needs to be more scalable. It is suitable for small and medium businesses. I rate the product’s scalability a four out of ten.

The initial setup was easy. We have deployed physical infrastructure on-premises, managed via the cloud. It took us a few minutes to complete the process.

I rate the product’s pricing a two out of ten.

I rate Aruba Instant a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution as a base for our site office. 

The virtual controller can handle up to 16 access points.

The features you get in the controller are excellent. 

You can handle all of the access points at once virtually instead of manually handling each one. You're able to populate all of the information to all of the access points through the virtual controller as well. It transforms everything it a single access point, which simplifies things.

The solution should be able to support more users on the access points.

The solution should allow for more roaming capabilities. If you're roaming from one access point to another, the process should be quicker.

The solution could use auto-channeling so that it could automatically pick up channel overlap.

I've been using the solution for five years.

The solution is stable.

The scalability of the solution is good. Right now we are using the solution across five offices with 100 users.

The solution's technical support has been good.

We've used Huawei, which is also good. We're integrators, so we implement either solution according to the project requirements of our clients. I do find Aruba more stable and easier to use than Huawei, however.

The initial setup was straightforward.

We use the on-premises deployment model.

I'd recommend the solution; I find it more stable than other options.

I'd rate it nine out of ten.

We propose it to our customers for Wireless LAN. Internally, in our company, we use Cisco. 

We have many customers, and we implement wireless systems with Aruba, Cisco, and Extreme. There are many customers that use Instant Cluster, and we have customers that use it on-premise. It depends on the people working at the customer side. 

It is very cheap. I can use the access points without an additional license. 

I can implement it at small sites, and I can also implement it at mid-sized locations. It is very flexible. It is really nice and useful for customers who have many small sites. 

It is good as it is. If anything, its reporting could be improved. 

At the moment, I don't see any new features that we really need.

I have been using this solution for about eight years.

It is very stable. It works very well.

It is scalable.

I don't know about their support. It is working fine, and I have had no problem with it.

If I need any information, I can take the help of the Aruba Community. I have access to all the resources on Aruba, and I can search for information if I need to implement things that are not normal and that are not base configuration. I can find everything about Aruba.

It is very easy. I like its setup. It is done in an hour. 

It is not expensive. Its price is fair. You get many features with the normal licensing. If I look at Cisco, it is very expensive if I need similar things.

It is working very well at the moment. I see no problem with it, but it has its own use case. I can't use it everywhere. It is not suitable for a big campus area. I would need a controller-based system such as Aruba Controller.

I would rate it an eight out of 10. It is very good, and I like it.

I use Aruba Instant because it has firewall and inspection features that are the best for me because my child is using the wireless network and I can just block whichever websites I don't want my child to see. For what I need, the roaming is working okay for small networks.

Nothing really to improve. The Instant is simple. But when I'm using the controller, then I'll use the advanced features.

The Instant has a problem with the VPR 3 when I am working with the roaming. The problem is that the keys are incorrect and I must do a disconnect and reconnect, and then it's okay. But I don't know exactly where the problem is because VPR 2 is okay. I would like it if they could fix this. Again, I don't know if it's a problem with them or it's a problem with my device. 

Additionally, storage is difficult for me. Metal storage, swimming pools, and garden storage are difficult for me. Also, the shopping centers where I track people are difficult. But offices are easy, offices are no problem.

Because we are using triangulation, there is a problem because you never know which access points are used and connected and which devices are connected on any access point. If there are a lot of different devices, and maybe old devices are present, there are problems.

I've been using Aruba Instant for about a year and a half.

In terms of stability, Aruba Instant is the best on the market. 

I am a novice in the Cisco platform and it may be difficult to move to the Aruba platform, but what you can do with Aruba is better than what you can do with Cisco.

In terms of scalability, it's the best on the market.

I have not contacted technical support yet.

The initial setup was complex. The deployment is not too long. We deployed in two days. And the testing took around one week. Deploying is not a problem. The design area is more complex. Troubleshooting and site survey are more difficult for it to work well.

We implemented on our own with books, websites and brainstorming in the office.

I recommend Aruba Instant because it's cheaper for licensing and it's simple for implementation. It's all in the Instant version.

On a scale of one to ten, I'd give it a seven. I would not give a ten because there is a problem in the preferred portal access points when I'm using the portal. The problem is - which access point is preferred for the virtual controller?