Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

We use Ruckus Wireless WAN to control our guest users. We brought our traffic on a network. We also integrate Cisco Integrated Network Access Controller with our Ruckus Wireless controller. We use this integration for two purposes: security tagging and to bring users into a group according to the health of their system. If it’s a guest, they should not have access to our critical infrastructure assets. If a user is an admin, they will be placed on the WAN that is relevant to the management WAN of the devices.

Scalability is a valuable feature. For example, if you have a person from the HR department on the tenth floor and another person on the first floor, they should have access to the same VM or network. The Ruckus Wireless controller allows you to control this regardless of where the APs are physically located. You can control it from a central point, which makes it easier to manage.

Huawei is a competitor of Ruckus Wireless WAN solutions. They offer IoT-enabled solutions, and their access points are very robust for outdoor use and can manage up to 500 users. However, their products’ bandwidth and frequency range are not as good as some locally available products, and the cost is also higher.

The GUI interface of Ruckus Wireless WAN could be more usable, especially the drag-and-drop feature. When switching a WAN, users should not have to go into the configuration and manually change the WAN. Instead, there should be a drag-and-drop feature like most other vendors offer. This would make the process easier to understand and complete.

Additionally, Ruckus Wireless WAN should consider adding a special provision for APs. This would be helpful for marketing campaigns, but it is not mandatory.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for two years.

The product is stable.

Almost 1,500 endpoints, including IoT devices, and one administrator are working with this solution.

Ruckus Wireless WAN has local support, and the local staff and office are very active. They respond to calls promptly, and Ruckus Support is also very good, with a quick response time for emails and tickets.

Cisco is more focused on its branches. Huawei has more customers in telecom operating sectors, such as optical fiber and other devices. Ruckus is the only brand we can test on, with a focus on the app and controls.

You can quickly get help online from the Ruckus Wireless WAN community. You can even watch videos on YouTube on how to install and upgrade your servers. There was a complete series of installation videos, and I could install it myself. It was very easy and convenient.

If you're planning to install Ruckus Wireless WAN and need to research something you can't find anywhere else, the Ruckus community is robust. Simply Google a Ruckus-related question, and you'll likely have an answer within two to three minutes. Other devices, even Cisco’s unified devices, are still relatively new. While Cisco has a strong community, if you're looking for a solution to a problem without contacting support, you may not be able to find much help online.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

Many of my company's clients use Ruckus Wireless WAN.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from what my company's clients look at, which includes the solution's bandwidth, data speed, and coverage.

The pricing of Ruckus Wireless WAN is an area of concern. Ruckus Wireless WAN should slash its current price to match the prices offered by its competitors. Ruckus Wireless WAN should offer a competitive price to its potential users.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for four years. My company has a partnership with Ruckus.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine to nine and a half out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight and a half out of ten.

My company handles 5,000 users of Ruckus Wireless WAN.

My company caters to the needs of enterprise-sized businesses who wish to use Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

The initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN is very easy. I rate the initial setup of Ruckus Wireless WAN an eight out of ten.

The solution is deployed on the cloud and on-premises, depending on the preferences of our company's customers. Right now, most of the people prefer the solution to be deployed on the cloud.

The solution's deployment takes around 15 minutes.

I rate the product's price a seven on a scale of one to ten, where one is cheap, and ten is expensive. Ruckus Wireless WAN price is quite high, but if you want a very good product, then it will be pricey.

Ruckus Wireless WAN has every feature that my company's clients need. Lately, Ruckus Wireless WAN has made itself available on the cloud while also offering Ruckus One to cover everything related to the expectations of the solution's users. My company will only have to look into the solution if any of our customers come up with any new requirements related to Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I would tell those who plan to use the solution that it is a good product that is easy to maintain while also offering reliability.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

I have not found any issues with the solution so far. Whenever I encounter an issue, I chat with support and open a ticket. I have found the communication, hardware, and time to be fine. I have not found any issue in communicating and getting a service. However, the pricing of the solution is very high. I have found Aruba to be cheaper compared to Ruckus. I believe that there should be a reasonable difference in price in the market.

I have not used the location services feature. I don’t know how to monitor it. Cisco has a working Aruba where the latter also has a server. I have not used the monitoring tools either.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for more than ten years. We are resellers of the solution.

The tool offers stable, reliable, and consistent connectivity over WiFi.

The solution is scalable.

Technical support was helpful. I had sought technical support over one report three to four months back. They were fine. I would rate the technical support between eight to nine.

The initial setup is very easy and you can customize it as per the customer’s LAN and WAN requirements. The installation is different from client to client. It depends on the physical condition to install or finish the project.

I have a couple of people who do the physical deployment while I handle the configuration and server settings.

We do a survey where we ask customers about the kind of WiFi service that they are going to use like voice service, data service, etc. After the survey, we generate a heatmap using my account in the zone planner. I forward the report to the presales team after which they forward the quotation to the customer. If the customer approves the quotation, we go ahead with the installation.

The point where we get stuck is when the customer asks for multiple quotations. When we provide multiple quotations, there is a high chance of customization.

I am not satisfied with the pricing of the solution.

I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. We are the resellers of the solution and we work with it on an infrastructure level. I have experience in the installation of the solution. I have installed ZoneDirector 1200, SmartZone 100, Wi-Fi 5, Wi-Fi 6, and a couple of access panels. You can trust and rely on the consistency and reliability of Ruckus Wireless WAN on the WiFi. I had instances where customers had asked me to replace the competitor products with Ruckus.

I have been working with WiFi for more than 17 years. I am not able to convince customers because of the pricing of the solution. Otherwise, we could have sold lots of this tool to the customers. We provide maintenance to our customers. There is also no specific maintenance required for this solution since I have installed a couple of solutions for customers and they are working fine. There is no maintenance required to upgrade until the customer complains that ‘We do not upgrade anything and all the soft software is available on this.'

Ruckus has multiple radios. Therefore, it supports high speed for users and clients. Other vendors have fluctuations in speed. The main thing about Ruckus is that you can trust it and rely on its speed. I am simply satisfied with it.

We primarily use the solution for the controller and the switch. We use it for multiple access points. When we need to access the network wirelessly, we can use this product. 

We have seen some benefits while using here solution. We've been able to deploy it for 150 users without any issues or lag. The connectivity is great.

The connectivity is good. There's no lag at all in service. 

We like how easy it is to manage everything from the console on the cloud version. 

It is stable. 

The solution can scale. 

It is not too hard to set up. 

The solution needs to offer more analytics. 

We would like it to be easier to troubleshoot the network. It's a bit complex to do so right now. 

I've been using the solution for over ten years. 

The stability of the product is okay. Sometimes there are hardware failures, however, the company does provide replacements. 

The solution is scalable. I'd rate the ease of scaling at an eight out of ten. 

We have about 50 clients using the solution. 

We likely will increase usage in the future. 

We can reach out to support via the support portal if we need to. 

We did previously use a different solution in the past. I cannot recall the name of the company.

The implementation process is straightforward. It's not complex. You just follow the guide.

Deployments don't take long; however, it depends on the requirement. 

One person can manage the deployment. You don't need a big team. 

The solution is worth the investment. 

The pricing is moderate. It's not overly expensive. There are no extra costs or hidden fees.

We are Ruckus partners. 

I'm not sure which version of the solution I'm using. 

I would rate the solution nine out of ten. We are mostly happy with its capabilities. 

We use Ruckus Wireless WAN for business purposes, particularly in health institutions such as nursing homes and hospitals. Our users are mainly nurses who use their mobile devices, including long-term residents who need private and safe wireless access.

What I like best about Ruckus Wireless WAN is easy administration. After installation, you'll benefit from how easy it is to administer the product.

I also like that the product can cover the whole area with just a few endpoints.

What needs improvement in Ruckus Wireless WAN is the initial setup. It could be easier.

Availability is also another area for improvement in the product.

Another huge disadvantage of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the cost you must continuously pay for the licenses.

I've been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for three years now.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is very stable and has no problems with stability.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is a scalable solution.

I have no direct contact with the Ruckus Wireless WAN technical support team. A different person directly contacts the support team, but I have not heard any bad feedback. Ruckus support isn't the best in response time, but it's okay, technical support-wise.

We purchase Ruckus Wireless WAN whenever we have a high percentage of usage, where many people have access points, for example. For countries with lower densities where the wireless WAN is primarily used for business purposes, we use cheaper solutions than Ruckus Wireless WAN.

The initial setup for Ruckus Wireless WAN was challenging.

Compared with Cisco Wireless WAN, the pricing for Ruckus Wireless WAN is two out of five. Ruckus Wireless WAN is twice the price of Cisco Wireless WAN.

My company is currently using Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I'm responsible for several countries, with the leading country focused on Ruckus Wireless WAN. In contrast, a decision has yet to be made in other countries, so other countries use different equipment. For some countries, my company is still deciding which vendors to work with, in this case, WiFi access points.

The management console for the WiFi access points is on-premise, and Ruckus Wireless WAN is deployed on-premises.

As my company has ninety facilities, its users of Ruckus Wireless WAN reach approximately three thousand to four thousand.

I would rate Ruckus Wireless WAN as eight out of ten because the functionality is excellent. The stability is great. You also get high reliability from the product. I can't rate it a ten, though, because of its price and you need to pay continuously.

I recommend the product to others for specific use cases. A disadvantage is that Ruckus Wireless WAN isn't always available. You can reserve it, but you can't buy it instantly, particularly in higher volumes. For a new nursing home, my company needs to buy forty to sixty at once, but that can't be done.

My company has no partnership with Ruckus.

We use Ruckus Wireless as a wireless solution here and for switching as well. They are also great for outdoor connectivity.

It's great for the hospitality industry. We mainly deployed it here in the hospitality industry as they are very concerned about their customers in hotels. They stay there for leisure, so they don't want any complaints about their WiFi solutions. We mainly deployed them in five-star hotels and in sports facilities. 

We deploy them in our universities where there are a large number of students with multiple devices (laptops, mobile phones, smartwatches). They need a strong, robust solution for WiFi, so we use Ruckus Wireless. 

We rate them very high. We found it a very robust solution.  

I like the smart roaming feature. It is very valuable for us. Nowadays, people use video conferencing on phones and for Zoom meetings, so, while walking on campus or in a hotel, people experience no disconnection while using Ruckus Wireless. It literally helps us give a better experience to the end user.

The initial setup isn't complex. 

It's stable.

The solution can scale. 

The solution offers good security.

The pricing is fair. It's competitive. 

We found the technical support to be helpful.

In my region, I want to increase its distribution channel. We have one sole distributor here in our region. To have multiple distributors here would be very helpful to improve the supply chain. We need better access to stock.

I've been working with the solution for around seven years. 

It is a very stable product. We work on Cisco, Huawei, Aruba, and different wireless solutions, however, as a technical person, I find that Ruckus is one of the most stable products I have experienced.

It has great scalability options. They have controllers that support 3000 APs, so it is more than enough. 

The number of users can easily be ten to 20,000 in a larger-scale network. It is not an issue having a number of users. It is a very scalable solution.

We have used support and find them very helpful. We get service from nine to five, and even after five, if we need assistance, we can get help.

We also work with Cisco, Huawei, Aruba, and different wireless solutions.

We use Cisco here mainly in the market. Cisco was the leading product in switching and wireless before, or rather, Cisco and Aruba. Aruba is HP, and Aruba is a very strong product. However, when we started doing Ruckus, we grew more satisfied selling Ruckus as the more stable product. With a better product, we win the customer's trust and their businesses.

Initially, it's not so complex to implement. For a technical guy, it's normal. It's like every other solution; it's not very complex.

Depending on the setup, for a normal deployment, which would be two to five devices for a smaller-sized office, we can do it in one day.

We have five to ten team members trained on this, and multiple other products (including Sophos, FortiGate, and Cisco) and they can perform deployment and maintenance tasks.

How much staff you need for each deployment depends on the magnitude of the project. Normally, one engineer and one technician are enough for a deployment, which contains WiFi configuration in placement. However, in a case where cabling and infrastructure are needed, we need a different team. It depends on how much cabling is required. Depending on the requirements, we plan the project accordingly.

We can handle the setup in-house. We don't need any consultants to help us.

The licensing has different versions. Licenses are perpetual, you have to only buy one. However, they have support costs that are charged yearly for three years or five years. You have to buy the support for the license.

If you compare it to a similar kind of solution, the pricing is very competitive.

As a service provider, we have deployed many Ruckus solutions here in our country.

We mainly use its newer versions, which are WiFi six supported R550 and R650. These are the fastest-selling products. We normally sell R550 and R650 to our customers.

I'd recommend the solution to others. I'd rate the solution eight out of ten. 

I am using it to cover routers in the company.

I have found that WiFi coverage is the most important aspect.

I would like to see the billing system improved by adding a billing system integration.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for over ten years now.

The stability provided is very nice.

There is no problem with the scalability.

Before moving to Ruckus Wireless WAN we were using Aruba and Cisco.  We switched because of company standards.

The initial setup was straightforward and the process took one week to complete.

I would rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a ten out of ten.

The radio frequency status is very good, and coverage is good. There are concurrent users for other Wi-Fi products.

The pricing could be cheaper.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for seven years.

The stability is excellent. I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

Its concurrent capacity is 12 users.

Support's latency is very low.

Deployment depends on two different categories: indoor and outdoor. It is quite easy indoors or outdoors. Configuration takes a maximum of ten minutes.

The pricing is average.

It is a very good product. It is a good and efficient wireless product. Its controller, billing, and user duration have artificial intelligence functions. Its life cycle longevity is longer.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.