Aruba Wireless Reviews

• Branch and campus access
• Guest and employee access
• Device onboarding and device access
• Guests are divided into groups. 

• Providing WiFi access to employees and guests.
• Traffic segregation
• WiFi roaming
• Digital branch 

• Superior WiFi access and RF management
• WiFi security via WiFi Firewall 
• Access control
• Integrations with other systems

• Needs integrated wired, which is not traditional HPE.
• The new 8400 failed at Lab, plus its integration with Aruba Central. 
• Needs a good enterprise story, including branches and campuses.

Integrated firewall, integrated WIDS/WIPS on the controllers and the ability to tunnel LAN traffic from the switches through the controllers to set consistent 802.1x and access controls that are consistent across both wired and wireless LANs.

It improves security by helping us to centralize access controls and dot1x and set common policy across both wired and wireless LANs without having to install additional components.

The controllers used to include heat map functionality. This was removed in a recent release. To get this functionality now, you need to be using Airwave (AWMS), which adds additional cost. On the other hand, Airwave can be used to manage a multi-vendor environment, so there may be some other benefits to having it deployed, but it would be nice to have the heat map back in the controller.

I've been using it for five years.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

No issues encountered.

It's excellent.

It's excellent.

Default settings are sufficient to get a functioning wireless network up and running fairly easily. Complexity increases add vLANs, security policy, dot1x, redundancy, etc.

At my previous employer we had a relatively large wireless installation so we worked with a vendor team. The network at my current employer is small enough that I could handle it myself.

Licensing has improved. In the past all redundant controllers required licenses for all the access points. They've not implemented a centralized licensing model so that you only need to license your access points once.

We evaluated Cisco. Cisco's solution, at the time, required additional components to provide the same functionality. For example you'd need external firewalls, IDS/IPS, and authentication servers. Aruba controllers had all this built in. I haven't looked at Cisco's current offerings, so this may not still be the case.

I'd recommend you do the training.

I use Aruba Wireless to manage and monitor mobile users.

It has helped in making deployments easier despite the configuration's complexity.

I have found the Access Point (AP) group profile feature extremely useful. It makes deployments look easy.

• They should simplify the configuration flow. 
• Additional detailed reporting for client traffic would be a great addition.

The primary use of this system was to provide the best possible WiFi experience for students, faculty, staff, and guests of our campus. We had 88 APs throughout 14 buildings on campus. During the academic year, we could have hundreds of users connected to the APs at any given time. 

Compared to what we previously used to have, this product has enabled us to have more devices connected to our WiFi network. 

The feature that I love the most is being able to broadcast different SSIDs with different protocol requirements. 

AP signal strength and price. I know this is a competitive market, but APs should not cost so much if they do not cover a large area. 

The system was very good, but we needed to upgrade in order to adapt for our needs, and doing so with Aruba would have been more expensive. 

No issues.

We used a network vendor to work with us whenever we had an issue, so they took care of everything for us. 

With our previous system, we had to delete users who had not connected to our WiFi for a period of time. With this system, we did not have to worry about that. 

We used Cisco and switched because of the price. In order for us to get what we needed from them, it would have been too costly. 

Initial setup was very straightforward. We set up the switches and APs, then took it from there. 

Besides paying for the APs, you need to pay a license each year for their use. Therefore, watch out for that and do the best you can to keep costs down.

I can't remember, but we probably did.

It is a great product if it has what you are looking for. 

The Aruba Adaptive Radio Management (ARM), Spectrum Analysis and Wireless Intrusion Protection are the most valuable capabilities for me. ARM is helpful because it manages my network for me basically. The Spectrum Analyzer and the WIP are my eyes in the sky, so to speak.

First of all we use to have standalone AP’s and we had to manage each one separately which was very time consuming for me but now we have a centralized management network with the Aruba 3400 series platform that saves me time in managing. Secondly we had a lot of issues with clients hogging all of the airtime and causing other clients to have to wait but now with Aruba Adaptive Radio Management (ARM) all of our clients have a fair share of airtime and the adjustments are automatic in the controller.

They may have already improved on this but it would be good to have more than 4GB for the firewall. I think this is the only thing I can think of for improvements.

Just over one year

I didn’t have any issues when I deployed to Aruba 3400 series platform. The process was smooth and exciting.

I didn’t have any issues with stability. We have been up and running for over a year now and the users are very happy with our network.

I haven’t had any issues with scalability. We haven’t had any growth or additional things since we deployed the Aruba 3400 series platform.

On a scale from 1 – 10 I would say a 7. I haven’t used the customer service enough to give a higher rating.

On a scale from 1 – 10 I would say a 7. I haven’t used the customer service enough to give a higher rating.

Yes I previously used a Cisco Solution. We changed products because Aruba was better in cost.

The initial setup was straightforward. We deployed all of the hardware and configured the controller and watch the AP’s authenticate and associate with the controller.

We used a vendor to the deployment. The deployment went absolutely well. I will have to give the vendor a 10 for their expertise and work they did.

My ROI is 125%. We have better production for the workers and IT team.

No! We only evaluated Aruba.

If you are interested in a solution that is straightforward in configuring and deploying choose Aruba solutions. If you want features that will open up more time for you as a network admin Aruba solutions is for you. If you are looking to improve your WLAN performance, scalability, stability, and security Aruba solutions is for you.

We installed Aruba Wireless for some clients who needed to expand their network inside offices or homes.

It's an excellent solution overall. We were able to increase capacity very easily.

This type of equipment is easy - very easy to connect and configure inside a network. For example, you can use a cell phone to configure. It is very, very simple. 

When you want to check if the equipment is working it's quite straightforward. You can do it just with a cell phone. You can check if you've got any problem or any type of equipment connected to the network. It's useful to be able to check what the equipment is connected to or if there is a mesh connection between other APs. You don't need to use a physical cable.

While I haven't used it, Aruba has a server that can not just check the equipment, but also validate or log into the network. This type of server is wonderful, however, I don't know the name.

The initial setup is quite simple.

Many features are already in development. For example, Aruba Central, or the server to verify the type of equipment is connected to the network centrally. It's very useful and is a good solution for home or business, and it supports more than 200 pieces of equipment.

We're not really missing any features at this time. 

They could work on energy consumption as this equipment needs a lot of energy. This is probably what needs to be improved in the future, as, currently, this type of equipment consumes more than 60 watts. I understand that it needs more power to work, however, there must be a way to lessen it in future releases.

We've worked with this solution throughout the year.

The solution is stable and allows you to connect any kind of equipment - cell phones, tablets, laptops, any type of equipment that has a wifi connection. It is very easy to connect. There are no issues. There can be about 50 or 60 pieces of equipment working at the same time without losing connection or velocity, or use of equipment.

The solution can scale well and has helped us to increase capacity.

We don't have plans to increase usage at this time.

We installed one first, the first AP, the first equipment, and the others' equipment could connect without a network cable - just by mesh, like a network without cables. We increased the capacity of the network with this type of technology solution.

It is very easy to use. You just load an app on your cell phone from the Apple Store. You can continue with this application on your cell phone.

I would rate the solution at a ten out of ten. We've been quite satisfied with its capabilities. 

We have about 30 APs and a lot of sites with centralized management on controller 7030. We use it to control the network in standalone mode and handle the active and standby modes.

All features are useful for me. It lets me perform some specific configurations depending on the site or the client. All WAN features are valuable.

Their documentation needs to be improved. Aruba's documentation is poor.

I have been using Aruba Wireless Controllers for about a year.

Its stability is okay. There is no issue with stability.

Its scalability is okay.

Their support is good. When I need to open a case, I get a fast response. I can contact the technician immediately. I would rate them an eight out of ten.

I also use Cisco solutions. Both solutions are very good and suitable for different kinds of networks. Cisco is very good for certain kinds of networks, and Aruba is good for other kinds. Cisco is simpler to deploy, whereas Aruba is more complicated and complex to deploy.

The initial setup was very complex because we deployed a new controller in a small network. It is useful for large networks, but for small networks, it is very difficult to understand all the models. If you don't use Mobility Master, the configuration and deployment are very complex. It took us six months to deploy it.

We got help from a third-party vendor, not Aruba. They were okay. We didn't have any problem.

You should know about the topology of the Aruba Wireless solution. It is very important because it depends on the size of the network. Otherwise, you might end up buying something that's not adequate for large networks.

I would rate Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

We have Aruba IAP-225 APs in both a school and a health center environment. We initially had 15 of them installed at the school about three years ago and kept expanding to 45 APs at this site.

Our school was a challenge as each room has cider block walls, so we deployed a single AP in the ceiling above the wall of two classrooms. We primarily have laptops and iPads that connect in various classrooms and for training.

We had such great success that we have deployed 40 APs in a five level building to support a new Health Center that opened in January.

We have just started to use the captive portal option at our health center to direct clients to our patient portal while restricting bandwidth so they do not get carried away in the waiting room.

The full mounting kit has worked well above the ceiling.

The best part of the configuration is the virtual controller that we use to manage the environment. It provides redundancy of any AP acting as the controller should it go down. There are other controller purchase options for higher numbers of APs to support, but having this option has kept costs down and the devices have a lifetime warranty. The virtual controller has options for updating and remotely restarting any AP from one controller panel, and monitoring and configuration has been fairly simple from one console.

The ceiling grid mount clips have room for improvement. 

Support through third party vendors or direct from HPE has been easy to manage. They are very responsive.