Cisco Wireless Reviews

The easy way to integrate it with the existing network. Also, at the implementation, the simple management of the access points in a centrally console.

Before the implementation in 2006, we had 20 stand-alone access points where the administration tasks were complicated; any change has to be made in each AP.

Since August 2006.

Not really.

Until now they are very stable, but in some cases in which we had a problem there was a fix to solve the problem.

No issues encountered.

Good, 9 out of 10

Good, 9 out of 10

No, this product is the only one I have used.

As in the majority of new implementations there is a lack of knowledge of the products, but with some time and a lot readings at the end was easily.

It was a mixed schema; the case study and the initial implementation was made by a vendor, then, the tune up was made by us.

No, it was the only one because all the network infrastructure is Cisco: Total compatibility.

Have clear ideas about the requirements or goals for the company before implementation and have a good case study.

Cisco Wireless has improved in terms of the Tri-Band and the Two-Band, those types of two antennas. We've been happy with the architecture and the solution for some time. 

Obviously there are new requirements around WPA-3 and Wi-Fi 6, more wireless assurance, and those types of things. So we're looking at all of those options in terms of their next product suite.

I'm not a wireless engineer but we've had Cisco Wireless at the company for a long time, about 20 odd years. We're now looking at replacing the Wireless architecture.

Cisco Wireless is stable.

From a scalability point of view, there is a cost component which needs to be looked at and reviewed, but from a technical scalability point of view I think it ticks all the boxes.

Cisco's technical support is very good, I've never had an issue with their technical support.

Cisco has several pricing models. I think things have gotten more expensive due to the economic climate around COVID and things like that for most vendors now.

Everybody is price-sensitive. I'm just the partner, so I'm looking at the solutions for the client. I'm not the customer. The customer, obviously, would say cheap is better and because a lot of people are price sensitive now they're trying to get as much value as they can at a good price.

I'm not a wireless expert, but we've been running Cisco Wireless for a long time. On a scale of one to ten, I would definitely give them an eight.

I think the licensing models need to be reviewed in some instances. Obviously Cisco's licensing models are quite challenging, and it can be costly. Those are the two things to check.

Our customers use Cisco Wireless for networking and WiFi.

It is a stable solution.

Installation is complex and should be easier. 

I've been dealing with Cisco Wireless for two years. We have two customers who use it.

It is a stable solution.

Technical support is average.

The initial setup is complex and took about one day.

I would recommend this solution.

On a scale from one to ten, I would rate Cisco Wireless at five.

Cisco Wireless gave us the ability to deploy and seamlessly manage wireless devices at our corporate office and remote locations.

It gave us the ability to view wireless traffic, unwanted devices on the network, and how they affected overall network performance.

• The ability to deploy wireless access points with templates.
• The ability to use campus maps to see access point coverage.

Most definitely the cost. 

I am not a fan of Cisco's software pricing model. Their management software is far too expensive.

We are in the finance sector and we use this product to provide wireless connectivity access to our web application.

The integration with Cisco ISE is good, and together we use them to provide services.

In the next release, I would like to have support for Wi-Fi 6.

I have been using Cisco Wireless for more than 10 years.

This is a stable product.

The solution is scalable. In our organization, we have more than 120 users. Our customers have more than 1,000 users.

The technical support from Cisco is very good.

The installation is user-friendly. The length of time required for deployment depends on the quantity. If you have less than ten then it will take no more than between three and five hours to complete. If we have enough engineers then each access point will only take one hour.

Our in-house team is responsible for deployment and maintenance. The number of people required to deploy depends on the size of the installation.

Cisco Wireless is a little bit expensive when compared to other solutions.

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend it.

I would rate this solution a ten out of ten.

Our main customer of the Cisco wireless is in the retail sector, for example, Walmart.

The customer always feels confident with the solution because of its reliability. 

In the future, it would be great if the solution had a GPS feature that could have the ability through access points to locate cell phone users inside a local wireless network, for example in a stadium. 

I have been using the solution for approximately twenty years.

The stability is very good.

We have never had an issue with scalability with this product. Our customers are medium to large size organizations. We have found that small businesses discontinue using the solution more often than larger companies who tend to remains using it.

The support has been good for us.

The initial setup was easy, the documentation is good.

The deployment can take one day if the network is small but if it is a larger network it could take a while longer. When we have issues with security the process becomes more complex, taking more time.

The product could be priced better.

I would recommend before implementation, administrators must know the exact number of users.

I rate Cisco Wireless a ten out of ten.