Cisco Wireless Reviews

I am using the Cisco Wireless WAP 300, 200, and 100 series.

Cisco Wireless always has the latest technology that supports WiFi 5 and 6.

The solution could improve by having an advanced model with a controller. Additionally, the solution could be more secure.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for approximately two years.

I have found Cisco Wireless to be stable.

The solution is scalable, it has many features for scaling that you can use to control many devices.

Cisco Wireless is good for small to medium-sized businesses.

We have approximately 100 users using this solution.

The support has been good. I have had no issues with them.

The implementation is simple.

One engineer can install the solution. We have two engineers for the support of the solution.

There is no license required to use Cisco Wireless solutions.

I would recommend this solution.

I rate Cisco Wireless an eight out of ten.

A small office at the time that needed the ability to host network services that changed daily.

• Overall cost per unit including licensing was too high for the value.
• The range of the APs was not excellent but mediocre at best. 

The ability to control any device from the cloud.

Significantly reduce the licensing fees.

Checking out alternatives right now.

Don't use Cisco Meraki. While pretty, the devices and licensing aren't worth the cost.

Mobility device support. It can provide support for real-time applications, such as VoIP and Video Conferencing over wireless infrastructure.

For industrial IT (sensors, programmed logical controllers, trains, ports, mines) and IT for offices, we can support real-time information, reducing risk for people, speeding up time to market and giving real-time access to information and communications.

This is a good product but some basic configurations were missed such as:

• The bind configuration between a physical port and an IP address
• Health check for authentication/authorization server.

Three years.

No.

No.

Seven out of 10. They are slow to answer.

Yes. We switched due to company decisions.

Complex. The solution works for beginners with basic implementations.

It is an expensive solution.

Yes, Aerohive and Aruba.

We use the solution for our company as well as for our clients. 

What's the most important for us is the reliability of this product, and that's it. We are sure that they work fine and they are fully developed and add great new functions.

The support is very good.  Technical support is very helpful.

The initial setup is easy - especially in the Mobility Express solution.

The stability is very good. 

Cisco proposed a new version of their product, however, I don't have any requirements which are not already met.

For all products on the market, the availability of the products may not be ideal. We're waiting on a lot of products simply due to the fact that there's a material shortage. We've ordered products and have had to wait three or four months for anything to get delivered. This is not just Cisco. It's a problem on the market for all components which include semiconductors.

I've used the solution for 20 years. I've used the solution for a long time. 

We've never faced any stability issues. It doesn't crash or freeze. It's reliable. 

We use this solution for medium enterprises. 

I'm very satisfied with technical support. The technical support of Cisco is the best on the market. They are very helpful and responsive. 

I also work with Fortinet. I have much more experience with Cisco. I don't have so much experience with Fortinet.

The initial setup is very straightforward. It's not overly difficult or complex. A company shouldn't have any issues with the process. 

As integrators, we can install the solution for our clients. 

They have different products which can be used by some customers, from small and medium to large enterprises. The portfolio is very wide. It's difficult to say if they are expensive or not as they have expensive products, however, they are very scalable and great for very large objects.

Maybe they are a little bit above the average on the market, however, for what you get, mostly it's worth it.

I'm a system integrator. I'm a Cisco partner. The company is a Cisco Gold Partner.

Cisco is great due to the fact that there is so much documentation online. It's very easy to research it and learn it and to troubleshoot if you need, simply due to the fact that there's so much shared knowledge out there. I'm not sure if that;'s the case for any other solution. 

I'd rate the solution at a nine out of ten.

We are customers of Cisco and I'm the company IT advisor and manager.

We find this solution very cost effective. We are using the WAP121 model which has good manageability, and stability. 

We sometimes have issues with user load. We have close to 12 users and we have performance issues, especially when we are on video calls. There are lags and connectivity issues in those situations and the throughput is not that good. From our end, performance and connectivity could be improved.

I'd like to see features such as app control, access control, and some level of a firewall feature at the level of the access points, features that are available at the firewall level, so that we can have security and manageability at WiFi level.

I've been using this solution for three years. 

We have a local support team and whenever we face issues they are very supportive. 

The initial setup was very easy. 

I rate this solution a seven out of 10. 

We provide seamless connectivity for the users in various locations. We can track a user and analyze them according to their behavior within the campus and according to their different locations. This gives us a full view of the locations that users gravitate towards and how they utilize the workspace areas within the campus.

The solution offers very good integration with a BYOD solution.

The solution offers very good application visibility and control integration for other analysis software.

We are looking for more interaction with end-users and need to use the engagement feature that is provided in the new series. We want interaction between the end-users and the software that we are deploying. Therefore, an integration that would use a user's mobile devices through some sort of engagement API would be a good enhancement.

We don't actually use the features to their full potential yet.  We're always exploring the features to see what we can add.

It would be great if, even if the solution is degraded, security-wise, if it could be integrated without extra overhead for the systems or wireless administrators.

I've been using the solution for 13 or 14 years now through it is different series 

The solution is very scalable using the options of the cluster-ID for the wireless. You don't have any limitations, even with one wireless controller. I haven't seen any limitations. It's very scalable and extendible. Performance-wise we can extend beyond the wireless controller through the FlexConnect feature. It's great.

On-premises, we typically have about 500 users.

Currently, our capacity is enough, so I don't foresee us expanding the solution in the near future. We'll see what happens after the COVID lockdown.

We haven't faced a huge problem from a technical standpoint. However, overall, their response to any queries has been very good overall. They are quite supportive and we've been satisfied with their level of attention.

I have only ever used Cisco.

The initial setup was simple, however, to get the full features, those performing the set up need some sort of experience, regardless of the deployment, the analysis of the location, or for the deployment for the engagement to the API.

We will be going to do that part right now. I have a feeling it will be a complex part of the process.

Deployment takes about one day or so. It doesn't take too much time.

We are an integrator. We handle the implementation for our clients.

The pricing of the solution is little expensive if you compare it to other competitors.

A long time ago, we were comparing this solution against Aruba before the acquisition to HP. We also compare other products however, the main competitor was Aruba.

We're a Cisco partner.

We use a variety of different versions of the solution, including the 800 Series, and 2800 Series. We are planning to go to the Catalyst 9000 Series soon as well. 

It's a centralized solution depending on the wireless controller and some access points have their own branches.

While not related to hardware, in relation to software capabilities, we're always looking for ways to better integrate solutions. This particular solution has been great thanks to the access technology provided. We have seamless integration with the infrastructure. The movement of the users is very easy to pinpoint. The user's onboarding onto the infrastructure is simple.

While the solution isn't perfect as a standalone, the integration capabilities on offer make it really special.

New users will really need to utilize features to get the most out of the solution.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten. There are a few features that we would like to see added in the future that would make it perfect.

The primary use case is providing network coverage to mobile devices in our company.

I find this solution easy to configure and use.

The coverage should be better.

There should be an option for a wireless bridge that can be used to join two access points.

Technical support takes too long and is something that should be improved.

It would be helpful if Cisco Wireless supported the Internet of Things (IoT).

I have been using Cisco Wireless for about five years.

This is a stable product.

Cisco Wireless is scalable, and we have more than 10,000 people on-premises who are connected to the cloud using it.

We have had problems with Cisco's technical support, so I would only rate them a five out of ten. They take too long to respond and also too long to resolve the issue.

We are also using Huawei wireless.

For somebody who knows about the configuration beforehand, the initial setup is easy. I can be set up an configured in half an hour.

The suitability of this product depends on the environment and the requirements, as every place has its own circumstances. Generally, I recommend this product.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

I use the Cisco wireless network at my company. I also sell all of the Cisco solutions, and most of these are for wireless networks. I also sell the related security products.

Security is an important feature for my customers, and I am able to offer this to them with our Cisco products.

I find the most valuable feature to be the security. People in Thailand consider their machines to be valuable, and this is their way of protecting them.

At this time, Cisco solutions integrate with other Cisco products. This is necessary in order for them to work completely. I would like to see better and easier integration with third party products.

My impression as a re-seller is that the Cisco products are stable.

The scalability of the product depends very much on the customer and their needs.

At this time I have approximately ten customers, including the Airport of Thailand.

I have used other vendors for security related products.

At this time, I feel that setting up these products is complex and difficult for customers to understand. I have found that the classic Cisco wireless interface is difficult for users to learn.

The deployment time for these solutions is approximately two weeks.

We have less than five people to assist with deployment of these solutions.

I think that the solution is expensive because the customer has to pay for a full year, at a minimum, in up-front costs.

I would rate this solution eight out of ten.