Aruba Wireless Reviews

We're using Aruba Wireless as a wireless access point, particularly Aruba AP-505.

We're also using Aruba Wireless for guest management purposes.

For my organization, the most critical feature of Aruba Wireless is guest management.

An area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is creating a DMZ. Without Aruba ClearPass, you need to allow guess access directly via the internet, which means you need to implement the security in between, so this is what I'd like Aruba to improve in the product.

Another area for improvement in Aruba Wireless is delivery because right now, in the COVID-19 pandemic, the product doesn't have much availability. There's a limited supply of semiconductors, so I want Ariba to increase Aruba Wireless production. The product needs to be available and delivered to customers faster.

I've been working with Aruba Wireless since 2016.

I would rate the stability of Aruba Wireless as nine out of ten.

From a scalability point of view, I don't see any challenges with scaling Aruba Wireless. After all, my organization only has one office and only needs approximately fifty APs.

Aruba Wireless has good technical support.

We used Cisco, the older technology, before using Aruba Wireless. We were not getting guest management as a feature on Cisco, while Aruba Wireless came up with guest management via Aruba ClearPass, so we started using Aruba Wireless.

The initial setup for Aruba Wireless was easy. It was so simple. My organization used it as a standalone solution.

Deploying the product took approximately six months.

We implemented Aruba Wireless through a consultant. Our experience with the consultant was good. He provided good support without the need for any intervention. The product was implemented well and working per our requirements.

The commercial department handles the Aruba Wireless license for my organization, so I cannot comment on the product's pricing.

I have experience with Aruba Wireless.

My organization is an Aruba Wireless customer.

My organization has three administrators of the product. Currently, there is no plan to increase Aruba Wireless usage.

I'd tell anyone looking to implement the product that Aruba Wireless works well in my environment. I have no complaints about it, so I can only say this.

Overall, I'd rate Aruba Wireless as eight out of ten.

We're upgrading from version 9 to version 10, but I'm satisfied with the new proposed upgrade.

The solution is deployed on-premises.

Aruba Wireless is reliable, and the signal strength is pretty good. The controller has good features.

I want to have a virtual controller, so I would like to see integration with other vendors of the LAN network. We need security features to recognize the traffic source and to apply Zero Trust security.

I have used this solution for nine years.

The stability is excellent. I would rate it as nine out of ten.

I would rate the scalability as eight out of ten.

We have multiple canvases and sites, so it's easy to scale up and across the same controller within the same enterprise network. When we add new access points, there is a limitation in the virtual appliance, but it's not that bad.

Technical support in Aruba is very good. It's better than other solutions' support.

I would rate technical support as eight out of ten.

Deployment was done through a third party.

The price is reasonable. I would rate the cost as 8 out of 10.

I would rate the solution as nine out of ten. 

We made an evaluation between Aruba and other vendors, and we've seen the Gartner Magic Quadrant report for Aruba. Aruba has employed a lot of experience and vision in their product, which is why it's better than others.

My advice is to have a professional survey with the best used tools for the survey and an excellent design. I think that's the most important. The sizing and dimensioning have to be done well from the beginning.

We deployed Aruba Wireless in our corporate head office, where we have a lot of business users. We use the product both as corporate WiFi and guest platform.

What I like best about Aruba Wireless is that it doesn't need a controller.

The product also has a GUI that's easy to navigate.

I also like that Aruba Wireless shows statistics that give you a lot of insight.

Aruba Wireless is a good product, but it still has some issues, especially at the beginning, where there's inconsistent syncing between the cloud and the APs. Sometimes, there's also a little lag when accessing the query.

I started using Aruba Wireless two years ago.

Aruba Wireless is a stable product.

I find Aruba Wireless scalable.

We've contacted Aruba Wireless support many times, but there weren't proper resolutions. Cases remain open for a few days, and then they'll automatically resolve. Then, sometimes, those cases will reappear.

Aruba support would be a four on a scale of one to five.

My company has a particular office on Cisco APs, then replaced completely with Aruba Wireless, one of the most extensive Aruba deployments in the company.

My company is still planning to switch from Cisco Wireless to Aruba Wireless in other offices. However, concerning Cisco Wireless, the product is pretty stable and solid. It has been running for years, but eighty percent of the environment is on Cisco Wireless, which Aruba Wireless will eventually replace.

Deploying Aruba Wireless is pretty straightforward.

It took several days to complete the deployment because the office was enormous and the number of APs deployed was quite significant.

It took one to two months to pre-stage, install, and make Aruba Wireless stable.

My company pre-staged the equipment and the APs, and then initially, the deployment team had a few issues during the Aruba Wireless installation.

A third-party team deployed the product for my company.

As Aruba Wireless doesn't require a controller, my company saved some money, so there's ROI from the product.

I don't know the exact costs associated with Aruba Wireless, but I have a rough idea, and it's not too cheap, though it's less costly than Cisco Wireless. Pricing for Aruba Wireless is moderate. It's a three out of five.

I have experience with both Cisco Wireless and Aruba Wireless.

My company uses Aruba Wireless IAP-245.

It's a centrally-managed cloud product.

Daily, the number of Aruba Wireless users varies. If there's a meeting, then many high-profile users will come. At least two or three times a week, there will be many product users, for example, IT engineers, designers, finance people, and people from other teams.

My advice for anyone looking into implementing Aruba Wireless is that it depends on the use cases. You get all the features available in Cisco Wireless at a lesser price, but in terms of support and stability, Cisco is ahead of Aruba. However, Aruba Wireless is a good option when considering the price and if you're a mid-sized organization.

Aruba Wireless gets a seven out of ten from me.

Our primary use case of the solution is hospitality.

The most valuable feature is that it can be tuned much more than other vendors, giving you more options to execute. 

The solution can be improved by simplifying the configuration. I would like to see a more user-friendly GUI that is not so easily confused when configuring clusters or even a single node when people are not paying attention to what layer they are configuring, whether it be at the mobility master level or at the node level. I would like to see more analytics that can help us pinpoint the cause of reduced performance related to the airtime and number of SSIDs being used.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I consider the solution to be stable.

I believe the solution is scalable.

The support team for the solution is good and always eager to help.

Positive

The initial setup is more complex than other solutions. You need to understand the technology, the way it's configured, and the way you have to set it up. The solution requires more knowledge and more commitment than others.

We implemented it in-house.

The pricing has increased and it was always more costly than some of the other solutions available.

I evaluated Ruckus and Meraki Wireless before choosing the solution.

I give the solution a nine out of ten.

Although there are other solutions available and some with a lower initial cost, they don't offer the same level of integration with IoT as this solution without having to add additional hardware, which ends up costing more.

I recommend that you gather all the requirements and define the API groups before the deployment of this solution.

I work for an international service integrating company and we provide resources that are distributed internationally. We use Wireless for our branch and remote locations, and it's mainly for the internet. We are service integrators and deploy this solution as well as provide support to multiple customers. I am the director of technology and we are currently customers of Aruba. 

Reasonably priced and great for small to medium size organizations. One positive is that they're not constantly providing upgrades and that reduces exposure to complications.

I haven't yet seen a cloud-based wireless controller in Aruba and I'm waiting for that as well as a heat map analysis which is also lacking. I'd like to see application visibility in the next release on the inbound and outbound traffic flow. 

The solution is working well and we haven't had any issues with stability. Traffic flow is starting to increase now that workers are returning to the office, and we're likely to move to Wi-Fi 6 or Wi-Fi 7 in the near future.

Getting a response from technical support is really tough and is a pain point for us. It doesn't flow like in Cisco Tech.

Neutral

The initial setup is pretty easy, certainly not as complicated as Cisco. There aren't many upgrades or major bugs so it's more stable than Cisco. Deployment time depends on the size of the project. A small site will take about two weeks, a larger project might take three or four weeks. We have nine engineers supporting Aruba.

I'm unaware of the cost but I know it's cheaper than Cisco and that is why Aruba generally wins when a contract goes to tender or in the procurement phase.

A key factor is to ensure the solution suits your requirements. If a smaller organization is looking for an on-prem solution, then Aruba would fit in. For larger deployments, it would be better to go with Cisco. If you're an organization with 400 different sites, Cisco is the way to go. Aruba has proven itself for smaller to midsize deployments.

The solution does what it's meant to and I'm happy with it. I rate this solution eight out of 10. 

Our primary use case for this solution is extending the LAN capabilities via wireless capabilities so people can roam around in the office with wireless connectivity. Additionally, its management has a lot of insight into which access point you're connected to and a lot of information about the devices. Some of the information is related to bringing your device, whether it's a device which is owned by the company or not and reporting what sites are being browsed and accessed.

We find its stability very valuable. It's been running for the past three years with no default configuration.

The solution could be more user-friendly.

We have been using the solution for a couple of years and are currently using the latest one.

The solution is stable.

The solution is scalable. We have approximately 300 users utilizing the solution.

We have had a relatively good experience with customer service and support. I rate them an eight out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup is a bit complex and requires some basic networking and wireless networking concepts.

We implemented via a vendor, and implementation took approximately one week.

We did not evaluate other options because we wanted one integrated solution which incorporated both wired and wireless, and with Aruba Wireless, we got the full package.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten. I advise users to research and decide based on their organization's needs.

We primarily use the solution for wireless access, for using WiFi and the network, the internet.

It's very popular. We've ordered more than 150 units.

It's a really good product. It's really easy to maintain. 

The AP preconfig with the USB console cable and everything is easy and really useful for the company. 

The installation is simple. 

Users have been very pleased with the solution as it offers such a high-speed connection. The network strength is good. 

It is more intuitive and user-friendly.

I don't have any access in the Aruba dashboard. I need more access. I only install the hardware and the software part for the client. However, there are no admin privileges, which is an issue. You need to contact them and make a special request. They should allow everybody to fiddle with their settings if they bought the solution.

I've used the solution for the past six months. 

We haven't had any performance issues. The solution is stable. 

The scalability is pretty good. You can expand it by using Aruba Switches. 

We have about 700 users on the solution at this point. 

I've never had any reason to reach out to technical support.

I previously used Meraki. Aruba has better network speed. Also, in Meraki, when we make changes, we need to refresh the dashboard. With Aruba, it's one click and we can regulate and refresh the dashboard. It's much easier. 

The solution is simple to install. It's not overly difficult or complex. For half of the preconfig process, it might only take 15 minutes. 

Then, there might be one and a half hours for testing, to fix the access IDs and other access points to match everything in the data center. 

We only need two people to install and set up the solution. 

I deploy the solution for our clients. 

We have seen a positive ROI.

I don't handle the licensing aspect of the solution. It is likely more expensive than Meraki since Meraki just has a dashboard. Aruba has a little bit more on offer. 

You do have to purchase the software and hardware separately.

We did not consider any other options before choosing Aruba.

We have a partnership with Aruba.

Overall, it's a good solution, and we are happy with it. 

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

Aruba Wireless does not have too many distinguishing feature sets. However, tunneling is more flexible in this solution than other solutions, such as Ruckus.

Aruba Wireless could improve the dashboard. It is not straightforward or intuitive to use and could be more user-friendly. For IT employees the dashboards are fine but when it comes to the end-user it is difficult. The Mobility Controller dashboard is not meant for non-IT employees.

I have been using Aruba Wireless for approximately 12 years.

Aruba Wireless is a stable solution. The controllers have been working well for over four years, but I have replaced a few APs.

I rate the stability of Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.

Aruba Wireless is scalable. However, you need to purchase certain models of the solution to have high limits. For example, the 7210 model has hard-coded limits that I cannot increase.

We primarily support hotels and I have completed 500 rooms. The system can handle approximately 500 to 1000 users.

When we need to escalate to a priority one case it is difficult.

I rate the support of Aruba Wireless a two out of five.

Neutral

I have used Ruckus previously and when I compare this solution to Ruckus, they are both very similar. I implement both of them.

The initial setup of Aruba Wireless is a lot easier to do than on other solutions.

The price of Aruba Wireless could improve. It is expensive. However, I am able to reduce my costs because I do not use all the features in the controller, such as the AD integration and other enterprise features.

I prefer Ruckus over Aruba Wireless.

I rate Aruba Wireless an eight out of ten.