Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Cisco Wireless WAN vs Ubiquiti Wireless comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive Summary
 

Categories and Ranking

Cisco Wireless WAN
Ranking in Wireless WAN
4th
Average Rating
8.2
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
71
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
Ubiquiti Wireless
Ranking in Wireless WAN
1st
Average Rating
8.0
Reviews Sentiment
6.6
Number of Reviews
73
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
 

Mindshare comparison

As of November 2024, in the Wireless WAN category, the mindshare of Cisco Wireless WAN is 2.9%, up from 2.9% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of Ubiquiti Wireless is 39.8%, down from 40.7% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Wireless WAN
 

Featured Reviews

Amimul Ehsan - PeerSpot reviewer
Well-developed but needs to improve the licensing part
The main issue associated with the product revolves around the licensing part and some support-related problems. The licensing area and support require improvements. In my country, the technical support offered is not good enough. The technical engineers who can support us are not that good. There is a shortage of technical people in our country. It is difficult for us to find someone who can help us.
Brian Massey - PeerSpot reviewer
It's cheap and easy to use but isn't suitable for large deployments or complex use cases
Ubiquiti isn't as good for larger networks as any of the other wireless solutions. It lacks performance, coverage, and some of the advanced capabilities other solutions have. Take, for example, integration with FortiNAC. Cisco, HP, and the other big names can move devices from one wireless subnet to another with FortiNAC on the fly, but Ubiquiti cannot. When we connect them to this special network, I have to turn them off and on, disconnect them from the wireless, and then reconnect. Then, it can be put into the correct location, but that's it. It's a small thing, but it's noticeable, It's hard to describe it in terms an end user would understand, but on the back end, it lacks some of those capabilities. It's not a true large enterprise solution. They're fantastic for small and medium-sized businesses, especially for the price, and they perform well when needed. For my part, I would actually like to move to something more appropriate for the size of our network, but again, Ubiquiti is so cheap.

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:
 

Pros

"The performance of the solution is valuable."
"The product can scale well."
"Cisco Wireless access points are highly stable with a wide coverage area."
"The most valuable features of Cisco Wireless WAN are the dashboards, security functionality, and Cisco DNA center. The way the solution has integrated within the fabric of the environment with automation is very good."
"The most valuable features are coverage and reliability."
"We don't see many troubleshooting issues. Normally, it's a user error when it comes to the JSS or the VPN. Once they log into the system or they get on the internet, then they log directly into the JSS, so they can do their work."
"The initial setup was really easy and straightforward."
"Granularity of standardization and technical controls."
"The failure rate is very low on these devices - I've had them installed for five years and have only lost one out of a hundred."
"The most valuable feature is more access points."
"I like the price, quality, and consistency of manufacturing."
"The scalability of Ubiquiti Wireless is very good. We can add and transfer access points, it is highly scalable."
"It's very easy to deploy."
"Ubiquiti is intuitive. The management interface is user-friendly. You can easily make changes and do the things that need to be done."
"Ubiquiti wireless proves especially helpful in scenarios requiring mobility."
"It's very easy to use. The hardware is very easy to use, compared to Microsoft. Microsoft is more complicated. It has software that is okay if you are familiar with it. In my opinion, Ubiquiti hardware is more heavy duty then Microsoft."
 

Cons

"The technical scalability is easy, but the license scalability is quite tricky."
"You cannot go to different versions or different access points. 9115s cannot interact with 9120s, and 9130s can interact with 9115s. You can add or remove as many subordinates as you want."
"If there's a problem, it's usually when Cisco pushes out updates. The users don't always push the updates to their computer, and it causes some issues. It's reliable as long as everyone is doing what they're supposed to."
"The pricing could be improved in future releases. It's quite expensive."
"It can be complex to set up."
"The prices are high and should be reduced in order to be more competitive."
"It can be complicated to configure the solution."
"In terms of improvement, there is always something that could be enhanced. For example, we can't change wireless channels in Cisco Meraki due to a recent standard update."
"Tech support is mostly remote and could be better."
"This solution should be more robust when it comes to connectivity and improve wireless technology."
"We have an issue with Ubiquiti Wireless every three to five months for one of the access points."
"After upgrades to the interface, some features disappear."
"I would like local support from the parent company."
"The external devices, the outdoor devices, are not so rugged. For example, for the weather that we have here in Florida, it doesn't hold up well even though it is supposed to be designed for outdoor use."
"The production is not very stable in our experience."
"The product lacks to offer reliability to users."
 

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The solution is not expensive."
"The license is not subscription-based."
"The cost of licensing should be improved."
"There is a license that is needed for the use of this solution."
"The price is too high. The licensing is on a yearly basis."
"The price of the solution is expensive. The license is priced based on the number of APs and controllers used."
"We pay the licensing fees on a yearly basis."
"It is very expensive."
"We don't buy directly. We have our finance department that buys things. My speculation on the price is that because we buy from private companies and because the product is imported, people tend to give us at higher prices. This is due to the fact that it is government procurement. So, sometimes, they are not paid directly, and they have to go through the whole administrative process before they are paid. So, they tend to compensate by increasing the price, but I won't be able to say what is the exact price."
"We initially spent around 10,000 euros on this solution and have been running it for several years. An access point costs approximately 160 to 180 euros."
"Its price is more attractive when compared to competitor pricing."
"The price of this solution is ok."
"This solution is cheaper compared to others."
"The price is reasonable and there's only a one-time payment. We have had this for a long time and I haven't seen any additional fee after paying for the installation."
"All the vendors' prices have gone up, so Ubiquiti has gotten more expensive. In terms of price versus performance, they're still well priced, but they are more expensive than entry-level products like Tenda and TP-Link."
"The tool doesn't have any licensing costs."
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Wireless WAN solutions are best for your needs.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
Computer Software Company
92%
Real Estate/Law Firm
1%
Healthcare Company
1%
Educational Organization
1%
Computer Software Company
11%
Comms Service Provider
7%
Manufacturing Company
7%
Educational Organization
7%
 

Company Size

By reviewers
Large Enterprise
Midsize Enterprise
Small Business
 

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Cisco Wireless WAN?
Stability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Cisco Wireless WAN?
The licensing policy of Cisco Wireless WAN is not satisfactory, similar to other vendors. Hardware prices have decreased. That said, licensing costs seem to compensate.
What needs improvement with Cisco Wireless WAN?
Cisco's complex structure was a factor that led us to consider replacing it. It is also more expensive than other alternatives. We had issues with roaming between access points, especially when mov...
Is Ubiquiti Wireless better than Ruckus Wireless WAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless is extremely easy to set up and is an excellent option for small businesses, offering enterprise features for a one-time fee and no ongoing licensing fees. Ubiquiti Wireless is ve...
Which is better - Cambium or Ubiquiti Wireless?
For me, Ubiquiti was easy to install, configure, set up, and maintain, while also providing solid coverage and better handoffs between APs. This is especially relevant if you are using Apple produc...
Which is better - Ubiquiti Wireless or Cisco Meraki Wireless LAN?
Ubiquiti Wireless offers a wide range of WLAN products. We tested their devices before ultimately choosing Cisco Meraki. Ubiquiti devices have good outdoor performance and the connection is very st...
 

Learn More

Video not available
 

Overview

 

Sample Customers

Aegean Motorway, Baylor Scott & White Health, Beachbody, Bellevue, Brunel University London, Bucks County Intermediate Unit , Chartwell School, Children's Hospital Colorado, Cisco Live Milan, City of Biel, City of Mississauga, Dundee Precious Metals, Electricity Authority of Cyprus, Erickson Living, Goldcorp, Great Ormond Street Hospital, Grupo Industrial Saltillo (GIS)
NASCAR Grand-AM, Maritime Parc, Outdoor Music Festival, British Armed Forces, Arcadia School District, Moscow - Enforta
Find out what your peers are saying about Cisco Wireless WAN vs. Ubiquiti Wireless and other solutions. Updated: October 2024.
816,406 professionals have used our research since 2012.