Aruba Switches Reviews

I use them myself, and I sell them to my customers.

Users have to see it as a fabric completely. It’s not only one product. It’s the mixture and the association with the product.

The switches themselves do have security features. But most of it is in conjunction with the others.

The most significant features are their reliability and the options to change the ASICs. You can change a lot internally to improve performance.

For my personal use and experience, the documentation is very good. It’s very good documentation because the majority of American documentation, no matter if it’s a network product or other product, is always very good. It has been for even other products, not just IT products. And Aruba’s documentation is very well done.

It’s very well compared to some other documentation on the market from other manufacturers.

There’s always space for improvement. Improvements are mainly minor in handling, like the web interface. They make some improvements. In terms of performance, they make a lot of improvements in the backplane. These small improvements could make life easier.

I have been working with Aruba products since 2005. 

It is very scalable. I would rate the scalability an eight out of ten.

Technical support is very good. They’re very responsive, and it’s quite good.

Positive

It’s just a matter of some people preferring Cisco, some people preferring other brands. It’s just a way to convince a customer to change from a product. You need a good selling strategy.

In the professional world, you have different areas. You have very much Cisco-associated companies, and you have the former HPE ProLiant, which is now Aruba. Then you have Juniper, and you have different worlds. Customers have different preferences. So that is an issue now. You have to have a lot of good arguments to convince somebody to change a product.

Consider this: If you have a global operating, let’s say, a European-wide operating company, and they have already invested a lot of money in Cisco, for instance, it is almost impossible to convince them unless you keep exact records of when something was implemented. You need to keep track on a time scale and say, “Okay, now it’s about time to change the system.” You have to be at the right time at the right spot. Otherwise, it’s very difficult to convince them. It’s easier to convince smaller companies.

The initial setup is quite easy. Once you know what you do, it’s easy. If you don’t know what you do, especially with the latest software type, with the CX software type, it’s a bit more difficult. You have to do a little bit more command line. But once you know what you do, it’s quite easy and straightforward.

It is also easy to integrate it with other solutions. 

For the customers, we mainly sell them and implement them. That is our main aim. Our own switches work very reliably. They are a few years old, but they still do what they’re supposed to do.

Sometimes, the license is a bit too overpaid. Sometimes, the license is okay.

Overall, the pricing strategy is fairly reasonable.

Since I’m an Aruba partner, we have project prices.  

The switches themselves, on a hardware level, are about eight out of ten. They all play in the same league, the upper league or the Champions League. There’s nothing negative about them. It’s a question of philosophy.

It’s my philosophy to recommend the best of the breed. Sometimes, I do recommend products from different manufacturers. If I’m convinced another product is more suitable for the project or the customer, then I will recommend that product.

I would definitely recommend Aruba to other users. 

I use the tool in my company for our infrastructure's network switches, access points, and the controllers that the product provides.

There were some issues in Aruba Switches, specifically Aruba PoE Switches since working with it in our company damaged our network. The timer and the internal battery in Aruba Switches don't work sometimes, and if users want to replace the battery, it is not safe. Sometimes, there is a need to configure and reconfigure Aruba Switches every two or three months to avoid cutting off the power of the product. Considering the need to

reconfigure the switches in the controller when it comes to Aruba, I would say that, comparatively, Cisco is a stable product.

From an improvement perspective, I want Aruba Switches to have a longer life since it doesn't work properly after five years of use.

If a user wants to configure Aruba Switches after using it for five years, there is a need to keep reconfiguring the product, the controller, and access points every three to five months, which is very problematic. Considering the controllers or the access points attached to Cisco at multiple sites in our company, I can say that the switches from Cisco are good when it comes to the setup phase. If I compare the switches and controllers from Aruba and Cisco, I would say that the products that fall under Cisco's side are better.

Aruba Switches should have a longer life and not just a product that offers stability for five years. The tool should be able to function properly for around ten years. Considering factors like infrastructure, cost, management, and business decisions, the production is able to offer a long life to users.

I have experience with Aruba Switches. I don't remember the model of the solution.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a six out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Aruba offers better options when it comes to the area of scalability compared to what Cisco offers. Aruba has a better graphical user interface that helps users with the configuration part.

Around 200 people in my company use the product. There are two administrators for the product in my company.

My company doesn't use any technical support from Aruba because the switches we use are very old.

Before Aruba Switches, my company used switches from 3Com, HPE, Dell, and many other vendors for around nine years. After a period of nine years, my company switched to Aruba Switches. My company chose Aruba Switches since we wanted to move to a new product. Presently, my company's experience with Aruba Switches has been very bad.

Aruba Switches are very expensive. The product has many features printed on it, but the problem my company faces with the product is related to the fact that there is a need to reconfigure the solution every two months or three months after five years. Aruba Switches don't work properly in a stable manner after five years.

My company may opt to upgrade our network and infrastructure in the future, so we are considering the switches from Aruba and Cisco.

I won't suggest other people buy Aruba Switches since, for any infrastructure or network, the tool may come across as a costly product for the owner. Users expect the product to offer a long-life appliance for the infrastructure. I personally recommend Cisco Switches since it offers a longer life when compared to Aruba Switches.

I rate the overall tool a seven out of ten.

We primarily use the solution for networking. 

The cloud management is very good. 

Overall, it's a good solution. It is pretty robust.

The monitoring and notifications on offer are very helpful.

It can scale well.

It's stable. 

We've had issues with availability. We cannot source switches right now. They are hard to get. 

There are no missing features. 

The pricing could be lowered. 

Technical support could be improved in terms of dealing with time changes. 

I've been using the solution for three years. I've used it for a while now. 

The solution has been very stable. I'd rate it ten out of ten. It doesn't crash or freeze. There are no bugs or glitches. It is reliable. 

The solution has been scaleable. I'd rate it ten out of ten.

Technical support is helpful or responsive. However, they could always improve their services. The time difference when dealing with support can cause answers get delayed. 

Positive

We also use HP switches. However, we have the same issue in that we are having trouble with availability.

We wanted to move to Aruba based on the simplicity of integration. We can manage all access points with the same interface using Aruba. The monitoring and notifications are also good. 

There only needs to be one engineer involved in the deployment and maintenance. 

We have seen an ROI in terms of stability and the simplicity of monitoring and management. 

The pricing is expensive. It's gone up in price. For 24 ports, we are looking at a cost of $600 annually. I'd rate the affordability of the solution seven out of ten.

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

I would rate it ten out of ten. 

We've got switches on-premises, and they're managed by central management.

We primarily use the solution for normal office use. It is for normal networking, including wireless. 

I like that I can cloud-manage my network. This is useful due to the fact that I have multiple offices. 

It's a stable product.

We can scale as needed. 

The initial setup is relatively complex.

There is nothing to improve on in an enterprise environment, however, if you're wanting various  functionalities, you need to know how to do these things. It's not straightforward per se. Some training would be ideal for getting the most out of the solution. I had to learn a lot on the job by myself. 

I've been using the solution for three years. 

The solution is very solid, and very stable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product is scalable. We can expand usage if we need to. 

We have 300 people on average using the solution.

In terms of expanding usage, as a solution, at this point in time, I don't need to. With its wifi capabilities, it can handle a little bit more load, so that's fine.

Since I have the solution through a partner, I use the partner services. It's up to them to get me in touch with support if needed.

We had very low-end build switches or old Cisco switches previously, however, they were relatively minor since we had moved to a new office and the company was relatively young at that point in time. Afterward, we made an investment in Aruba.

The initial setup is not necessarily straightforward. It is complex. 

A service partner did the implementation. It took about a month and a half.

We had a service provider assist us with the setup. 

We pay an annual license for the solution. 

It is an enterprise product, so it's not the cheapest, definitely. I'd rate the affordability between a three and four out of five.

I'd recommend the solution if a company wants an alternative to a Cisco environment. It's a very reliable solution.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

They do have partnerships, and users can get training and insights on how to manage it from a partnership perspective. 

We got Aruba Switches when we wanted something very redundant. I have two core switches, and both of them are configured for fault tolerance. If one fails, the other one will be able to sustain the load of the network.

Initially, we had a 1G switch. Now that we have upgraded to Aruba, the infrastructure is on 10G. The throughput has definitely increased, and many people were able to realize the speed of the internet and data sharing immediately.

I like the number of available throughputs and its ability to have different speeds of ethernet cards or fiber-optic SFPs. It's a core switch, and you can configure it as per your requirements.

All the configuration details are well documented on the HP website or Aruba website, and one can easily refer to those and find all the relevant commands from the documentation itself. It's also easy to maintain this solution. It's also cheaper than competing products. 

I don't think there is much to improve. I have seen that Aruba releases the patches on time, and it keeps upgrading the firmware. I have configured this device on an active basis. I don't think I have any bad reviews about the device's overall performance.

In the next release, I would like Aruba to incorporate wireless controllers and build them into the chassis.If we can integrate a wireless module, we can have a segment dedicated to wireless infrastructure.

I have been using Aruba Switches for nearly three or four years.

Aruba Switches stable. Until now, I haven't had a chance to restart the device. It's pretty stable and working well.

Aruba Switches are scalable. The device that I procured is a six-day device. In these six days, you can probably populate any number of ethernet ports or SFP plus ports, or any kind of interface.

It was okay as we had the help of an experienced external team. It took us almost two days to implement this solution. We have two technicians maintaining this solution.

I had an experienced team from outside who got the contract for configuring it. It was a team effort, a team from outside and my own IT department team. Both had to copy the old configuration running on an Extreme Network Switch and configure it on Aruba's high availability platform. As we did it over a weekend, the workers weren't affected.

Aruba Switches are cost-effective.

Aruba is cost-effective. I have a direct account manager who used to visit us to understand the complete requirement. On the other hand, Cisco costs way too much for the same kind of switching device. 

I think Aruba did a better job compared to many other vendors. In the end, I just wanted a solution that could serve the university's requirements. We have tested many different products like Alcatel Extreme and others.

On a scale from one to ten, I would give Aruba Switches a nine. 

It is very easy to configure. Aruba and Cisco are more comfortable for us in terms of configurations, including VLAN and most technical things.

Aruba is similar to Huawei or any other brand. 

It is very easy to set up. 

The solution can scale. 

It is very stable. 

Technical support has been good. 

The biggest issue right now is the delivery timeline. It takes too long to get the product.

We've been using the solution for ten to 12 years. 

The solution is stable. It's reliable and free of bugs and glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. 

The product can scale as needed. It's not a problem at all. 

We have two people who directly use the solution in our organization. 

Technical support is good. it's not bad. We are largely satisfied with their level of assistance. 

I'm familiar with Cisco and Huawei solutions.

The initial setup is very simple and straightforward. It's not complex at all. 

The Aruba Switch cost is normally high if it is compared to Huawei and many other brands. Typically it is a $500 to $600 difference in price.

We have a partnership with Aruba.

The solution is deployed at an access level. 

It's a comfortable switch to use and we don't really have any complaints. Normally they have built-in PoE Switches as well. We can connect an access point to them. There's no major issue in that regard.

I would rate them nine out of ten.

The primary use cases for Aruba Switches are for campus networks and data center stackable switch solutions.

Aruba Switches have provided significant improvements to my organization by offering robust networking solutions without the need for additional licenses.

The most valuable features of Aruba Switches include the dual control plane, stackable features such as stack V6 and VSF stacks. Additionally, the switches work with all necessary features out of the box, without requiring additional licenses.

Aruba Switches don't need licenses to activate features and work straight out of the box, which is an advantage over some competitors. This implies less room for complaints compared with other solutions.

I have used Aruba Switches for about five years.

The stability of Aruba Switches is high, as rated ten out of ten.

Aruba Switches offer high scalability, receiving a ten out of ten rating.

The customer service and support from Aruba are rated ten out of ten.

Positive

We work with Cisco and Juniper where extra licenses are often needed to activate features, which is not the case with Aruba Switches.

The initial setup was easy.

Aruba Switches are rated six out of ten when it comes to pricing, which means they might be more affordable compared with other vendors since they do not require additional licensing for features.

Other solutions that could be evaluated include Microsoft tools, AWS, and Juniper.

I recommend Aruba Switches as they are more affordable compared to other vendors and do not require additional licensing for our customers.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

We primarily use the solution in a hospital setting for switching. 

The newest switches are pretty decent. 

It is slightly more price effective than Juniper and it has a slightly larger range.

The solution could always be a bit cheaper. 

My experience with Aruba's account manager hasn't been the greatest.

Dealing with the server is very complicated. We'd like it to be simplified. 

The setup is complex. 

We've used the solution for three to four months. 

I'm pretty new to the solution. It is hard to gauge stability at this time. 

The solution is scalable. It comes in a range of options. 

The account managers are not the best. They make you do a lot of running around. A lot of the time, they don't even pick up calls. We don't like the way the business side is handled.

The dealers, however, are very responsive. That said, there are just too many rules and regulations when dealing with Aruba. 

As a systems integrator, we work with Aruba, Juniper, and Cisco switches. Aruba has more of a range than Juniper, which is more fixed. 

The initial setup is very complex. 

Typically, the solution is paid for annually.

The price could always be improved upon. 

We are a system integrator. 

I'd rate the solution seven out of ten.