Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

The solution is mainly used by carriers or for government usage. It's not really designed for normal usage.

The most valuable aspect of the solution is the size of the outdoor access points. It's great and you can disguise them quite well.

The solution is quite simple to use.

The virtual controller is doing a fine job.

For outdoor usage, I prefer Ruckus. It's the best of all the solutions.

The only issue with the solution is that there is quite a lot of strong competition. It's very difficult to get a government or large public enterprise to buy Ruckus or Aruba over, say, Ubiquiti, which is the standard here. For example, we just lost a Ruckus deal against Ubiquiti.

At this stage, there are only minor improvements needed. Overall it's a very good product.

I've been using the solution for two to three years. However, I only use it occasionally. It's very rare that I actually use the product.

We've had absolutely zero technical issues. The solution is very stable. It's worked fine ever since the integration entered into ClearPass. Ever since then, the radius attributes work fine now.

We haven't had any issues with scalability. The solution has been fine in that sense.

I haven't been in regular contact with technical support. The last time I might have contacted them was about three years ago. We had an issue when we were trying to integrate Ruckus into ClearPass on Aruba into the ClearPass radio system. That was solved, however. The issue was that at the time Ruckus didn't accept all the attributes.

These days, it's my understanding that they are very good at assisting clients. We're satisfied with their level of service when we need to work with them.

Integration, if you're lucky, only takes a week or less.

We're implementors as well as resellers. We handle the implementation for our clients.

The pricing, when compared to Ubiquiti, isn't competitive enough. If you want to have a Government or Public sector client they will ask why they should pay 200 euros if they can get something for 40 euros.

We're Ruckus reseller and implementors.

This solution is very high-quality. I'd advise other organizations to look for the best solutions for their situation. However, I know how difficult this is to sell. It's difficult to sell quality when organizations just want to see the price tag. This is especially true in the government and public sector, that are always constrained by budgets.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

It's a very good product. It's a high-end product and it plays in the right league. We do have customers who are willing to spend money, but it's very difficult to find these jobs nowadays.

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.

The product could benefit from features like Cisco's, such as improved zoning and analytics tools. A tool combining features from both Ruckus and Cisco would be ideal.

I have been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for about two to three years.

My experience with technical support has been good. Issues, such as license imports, were resolved within half an hour.

Cisco excels in radio technology and troubleshooting, though it is more expensive. Ruckus is more cost-effective and user-friendly for basic needs.

Cisco is easier to integrate with third-party solutions due to my extensive experience. However, integration with Ruckus is also feasible.

The solution has been reliable in our setup.

The platform's key features that impact network performance are multiple SSIDs, local switching, and mesh functionality. However, mesh is not recommended for high-traffic environments.

Its benefits include efficient zone deployment and access point distribution, simplifying network management.

I recommend it to others and rate it a nine out of ten. 

The solution is used to provide network access to users.

The solution can scale well.

The stability of the solution could improve in an upcoming release.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for approximately one year.

The solution is stable but could improve.

I rate the stability of Ruckus Wireless WAN a seven out of ten.

We have 30,000 users using this solution. The solution is being used extensively.

We did contact technical support.

I have not used a similar solution to Ruckus Wireless WAN.

The solution took a couple of hours to deploy.

Third-party assistance was required for the implementation of Ruckus Wireless WAN. We used two to three people for the deployment.

I have seen an ROI from using this solution.

There is an annual license needed to use this solution. The pricing model is based on how many access points are used.

I would recommend this solution to others.

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a seven out of ten.

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. 

The primary use case is to provide indoor and outdoor connectivity to our network.

The best feature is its ability to act as an outdoor local access point. We can deploy it on a tower or building, supplying local network connectivity. It is not restricted to an indoor environment, as is the case with some vendors.

The connectivity, speed, and reliability are very good.

Technical support is something that needs to be improved.

Ruckus needs to develop newer models that support cloud technologies. For example, they have a physical controller for these devices but I would like to see a cloud-based controller.

I had been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for two years.

My current company does not use this product.

Stability-wise, it is perfect.

This is a scalable product.

The technical support team needs to be improved. They should have field engineers, as opposed to only people available to support the backend.

Having the ability to arrange for a reliable on-site engineer would be helpful.

I would rate the technical support a four out of five. 

Positive

The initial setup is easy. It took us approximately 30 minutes to deploy.

I would budget between 30 and 60 minutes for installation and setup.

This product is worth the money that is spent on licensing fees.

In summary, this is a good product and I recommend the Ruckus outdoor devices. They have good support for this line of access points.

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten.

We use this solution for our customers with multiple branches who do not need experienced IT personnel to manage it. They can remotely manage their access points and switches using the cloud solution. 

It is very straightforward because it is plug-and-play and automatically onboard the APs to the cloud. It is a highly recommended solution for people with a little bit of IT experience who need a simple and fast deployment.

The most valuable solution is its simplicity. The solution is simple and easy to use. 

The company is investing in adding more features day after day. The analytics and network automation Ruckus added recently are also good features.

The product needs to improve its latency and performance.

I have been using Ruckus Wireless WAN for three years. Since it is a cloud-based solution, it always offers the latest version. 

It was recently renamed to Ruckus Wireless WAN from Ruckus Cloud.

The solution is stable, and Ruckus performs frequent maintenance windows to enhance its stability day after day.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is a cloud solution. When it comes to complex solutions, it is not a good fit. The solution is not scalable for complex solutions for the customers. For this, we consider an on-prem solution rather than a cloud solution.

We have about 25 customers using Ruckus WAN.

We are a system integrator. For example, one of our food and beverage companies has 12 branches of restaurants. We installed one single AP connected to Ruckus WAN in each restaurant. We consider each cafe or restaurant a separate customer, so one customer can have 12 branches.

I am quite satisfied with the support they provide. 

The initial setup of the solution is very straightforward.

The end user can complete the deployment in 10-15 minutes. 

You don't need an integrator, service, or solution provider to use Ruckus Wireless WAN. The end user can do things by themselves. 

The product comes with a yearly subscription. 

In general, it is a packaged solution with analytics, support, and a cloud license. The pricing is acceptable for licensing the cloud for a bundle.

I recommend the solution for people who need something simple, fast, and stable. 

It is a very simple and straightforward solution. It can help them have a stable wireless network consultant without much IT knowledge.

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

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.