Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN and D-Link Wireless are both popular wireless solutions. Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN seems to have the upper hand due to its ease of deployment and advanced features.
Features: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN offers robust security features, seamless integration with cloud management, and comprehensive analytics. D-Link Wireless is cost-effective, versatile in various environments, and beneficial for small to medium enterprises.
Room for Improvement: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN could improve its customization options, add more reporting tools, and reduce costs for smaller organizations. D-Link Wireless needs better technical support, enhanced stability during peak usage, and improved firmware updates.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN is praised for its easy deployment and efficient customer service, with cloud-based management reducing installation time. D-Link Wireless also has an easy deployment process but faces issues with customer service delays.
Pricing and ROI: Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN requires a higher initial investment but offers long-term benefits like reduced maintenance costs. D-Link Wireless has lower setup costs and quicker ROI, appealing to price-sensitive buyers despite differences in long-term benefits.
It's built for larger environments.
Juniper Mist is cheaper than Meraki, placing it in the middle of the pack.
It's a cloud solution with Mist, which helps troubleshoot and provides visibility to look at different access points.
Juniper Wireless Access Points work in conjunction with Juniper Mist Cloud Services and Mist AI to deliver premier wireless access capabilities. The Juniper Mist Edge extends microservices to the campus to bring agility and scale while enabling new applications at the edge.
We monitor all Wireless LAN reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.