Ruckus Wireless WAN Reviews

We are authorized distributors for Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I use Ruckus Wireless WAN and deploy it for my customers.

They use it for a variety of business cases, including the WiFi deployment for the business setup. If there are a lot of customers, with more than 100, or 200 branches, they prefer to have their own private cloud. They may want to deploy their own private cloud or simply use the public cloud. Corporate clients would prefer to use a virtual environment if they already have one; otherwise, they will opt for an on-premises hardware solution.

They have better WiFi coverage, in my opinion. The user has consistent network connectivity with no interruptions or business interruptions. 

They can use a voice video from the same device at the same time, and they have a great experience because my customers now have a greater number of our devices and are progressing to high-speed devices. 

My customer has requested that I increase the speed and bandwidth. They have achieved very high speed, stability, and reliability with the Ruckus deployment.

There are numerous features, but what I like about Ruckus is that they have a good coverage range due to their BeamFlex technique. When it comes to technology, we have a wide range of coverage in WiFi coverage scenarios. Based on that, we determine how many access points to allow in comparison to others. The BeamFLex+ is amazing. 

The demonstration and configuration of the GUI, are very easy. I don't have to be an expert on it. In terms of deployment, the GUI is very simple and user-friendly.

There are numerous other features, but this is one of the most impressive.

The method of documentation could be improved. To be honest, I don't like the documentation available on the Ruckus website. They are inserting multiple PDFs for each category of the PDF. There should be proper software with universal documentation. It is being done by a large number of vendors. They do not upload multiple documents in this manner. They only have one universal document. When you go there, you will find everything in one place. 

The documentation they do have is very difficult to understand. There should be some scenarios, deployments, complications, or techniques to follow. They are inadequate in that regard, and the documentation needs to be greatly improved.

The majority of WiFi competitors cover all of the features. WiFi standards have changed in response to the new versions. They compliment the new standards in the new versions or optimize it if there is a bug or a software release. However, in terms of the feature sets required in WiFi, I believe Ruckus has covered all of them.

I have been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for more than five years.

I'm using the 5.0. I use the older version as well, but the most recent one is 5.2.

It can be deployed both on-premises and in the Cloud.

I have also deployed it on a private and public cloud. I did not use the public cloud for the customer, but I did use it for some testing.

I am completely satisfied and have no reservations. I have no complaints about the performance or stability of Ruckus Wireless WAN.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is scalable. A large number of devices can be scaled. If you already have a deployment, you can add more than 60 to the existing setup. They are related to the campus requirement, which is a very detailed part.

We have many customers who are using this solution. It is for corporate users, or anyone else. It's not just for IT professionals. It is available to everyone. There are no problems. You only require WiFi connectivity to use Ruckus WAN.

We may plan to increase our usage in the future, but not right now.

The initial setup is easy. It is not complex.

The deployment time is determined by the end customer's work and requirements. 

If the customer is a small business, we can finish it in one or two days.  If a corporate deployment type is required, we will need to integrate with another vendor.  If there are any special requirements, it could be more than that. As a result, we anticipate a corporate requirements deployment taking longer than a week. 

If there are a hundred access points, the process will take longer. The number of access points may also be reduced. Essentially, the features vary depending on the features. If you see that they have basic feature requirements, we can finish it in one or two days at most.

The first thing we do is hold a site meeting. End-to-end site meeting with the end customer to understand what they want from the deployment, and what features they want to deploy. We conduct a thorough site survey. We verify the BOQ and check that everything is as it should be. We crosscheck the requirements, to determine the challenges.

Then we look at the site's construction and implementation, as well as the current state of the site. We will devise a strategy.

The resellers will do the deployments, but if the reseller does not want to do it themselves, we will do it for them.

One person is more than enough for maintenance from a configuration standpoint, while two or three people are required for complete deployment and repair of the AP switches devices.

Technicians who will help us with mounting, follow-up, and other similar tasks.

The cost of licensing varies. It is determined by the discounts offered.

It is simple to implement, it works well, the performance is good, and easy to manage. I would definitely recommend it to others who are interested in using it.

From a WiFi perspective, I would rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a nine out of ten. I didn't give it a ten, because there is always some room to improve.

We are a University and use this solution for our staff and students.

The actual wireless access points themselves are very powerful. We get very good coverage from just one access point. 

The throughput is very good and the centralized management is excellent. 

Also, the ease of deployment is very good.

There's nothing that anyone else is doing that the Ruckus doesn't do. 

If you compare to the market, I don't see room for improvement, to be honest. There's nothing feature-wise that I see with Ruckus that I think can be improved at the moment.

Of course, we'd always like it to be cheaper, but that's for every product.

I have been working with Ruckus Wireless WAN for six years.

It's a stable solution.

It's scalable, just as we expected it to be.

We have 30,000 to 40,000 users.

Technical support is excellent. They are very responsive, very flexible, and willing to listen to the customer. 

If we do have issues, we get escalated to senior support very quickly.

It takes approximately three months to deploy.

We have a network team of approximately six people who not only support wireless, they support switches, firewalls, and load balancers. 

We have six people who support Ruckus as well as other areas. Three to four percent of the time, they are supporting issues with Ruckus.

It's expensive but you get more coverage.

Approximately five years ago, we compared Ruckus with five other products in the market.

Even though the wireless access points are expensive, they tend to give you three times more coverage. We ended up with far fewer access points to support.

Some of the solutions we evaluated were Cisco, Aruba, HPE, and Juniper.

I would definitely recommend this solution and tell others to use this product.

It's fantastic! I would rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a nine out of ten.

The primary objective of these devices is to provide Wifi or a wireless environment.

We’ve had a wonderful experience so far.

It usually operates on mass technology, which is good. It has a controller, and you can control overall the map work or the equipment performance through that controller very efficiently. It has quite good bandwidth availability to accommodate many concurrent users.

It’s a stable solution. It’s reliable.

The solution is scalable.

I don't see anything which I can say there was a negative point for this product. In the last few years, we have never experienced any failure or any problem with this product.

The initial setup is complex.

We’ve been using the solution for the last five years.

The solution is stable and has been problem-free. It’s reliable. There are no bugs and issues. IT works smoothly and efficiently.

We have more than 200 users some days.

The scalability has been good so far.

We do plan to increase usage. We are adding some new areas, locations, and offices. We already have planned to deploy these. We’ve had excellent experiences over the past five years. We shall be extending a similar solution to the new locations.

Technical support is good. Sometimes we have to upgrade the firmware. At the time, we needed to upgrade the firmware, so we contacted the service teams and did everything. They are professional. We pay them and get good service. It’s not free. We have to pay.

We did use something in a previous building.

I have some experience with Cisco.

The implementation was complex. The setup was done in a multi-story building. Setting up the whole environment so that the different areas, different zones, and different localities we covered was a challenge. We had to work in quite a bit of detail. That was the concern at the time. You have to go into details so that you can manage it well.

The deployment was in two parts. One is the physical part, where we must deploy all equipment and the configuration part. The configuration took just one day to complete. The deployment part, over a multi-story building, took some time. It took maybe four to seven days. I don't remember exactly.

Since it was a new setup, it was a new environment; we had plenty of time to set up everything. That gave us quite enough room to cover any challenges which we faced. That said, being new, this was the first time that we were using this product. It took some time to understand some of the functions and some of the features of that product.

The deployment and maintenance is a one-person job. There isn’t much maintenance required. Sometimes if we see something overloaded or some switch is actually crowded, or if we connect with more users than the connections, we have to look at that. However, there's nothing much that we have to keep an eye on.

We had some local support available. With that help, the setup was no big challenge.

The deployment was kind of a mix of in-house versus outside assistance. Five years back, this was a new product for us. Based on the global reviews of this product, we took the decision to get some help.

We have witnessed an ROI. We saw an ROI after three or four years.

We pay a licensing fee on a yearly basis. It's for the support, what we’re paying for.

It’s moderately priced. I’d rate it 2.5 out of five in terms of affordability.

There are no additional costs involved.

We had other options in mind. We have a setup that is 15 years old. Before this, there were other equipment and hardware. This was a switch over to a new building and this actually caused us to switch over to new infrastructure.

If a potential new customer wants scalability, reliability, or efficiency, this one may be a better choice.

I’d rate the solution eight out of ten. There could be some improvements made in the future. However, I am mostly happy with the product.

We’re end-users of the product.

We use the solution for data application and internet access. 

Ruckus Wireless WAN is simple to use. Its coverage is better than other tools. 

Ruckus Wireless WAN needs to improve its pricing. 

I have been using the product for 10-15 years. 

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN's stability a ten out of ten. 

I rate the tool's scalability a seven out of ten. 

The tool's deployment is easy and can be completed in half an hour. One engineer is enough to handle the deployment. 

I rate the tool's pricing a seven out of ten. 

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN an eight out of ten. 

Ruckus Wireless WAN is used in hotels, schools, industrial warehouses, and camping areas for networking.

The most valuable feature of Ruckus Wireless WAN is the antenna technology.

Ruckus Wireless WAN we have a lot of component shortages in the world. This has impacted deliveries. We have large back orders of the solution.

I have used Ruckus Wireless WAN within the last 12 months.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is stable. We do not have a lot of failures. We have installed the units that have been on for years and nothing has happened.

Ruckus Wireless WAN is highly scalable. You can start with one and then expand up to 1,000. You only need to change the firmware of the access point and the management system.

The support from Ruckus Wireless WAN is wonderful. They have phone, chat, and online web support.

I have used many different kinds of similar solutions to Ruckus Wireless WAN. The one aspect that sets them apart from the other is the quality of the antennas. You can implement and design the networks in a very good fashion.

The initial setup is Ruckus Wireless WAN simple, it is logical.

The amount of people required to support Ruckus Wireless WAN depends on the requirements and what kind of business are you doing with it. We have large installations done by one person, but the ISP has to think about the first-line support. The configuration is not difficult it can be done by one person.

The price of Ruckus Wireless WAN is in the middle price range compared to competitors. You will find Cisco is the most expensive, the second is HPE and Aruba, and the third is Ruckus Wireless WAN. You then have all the follower solutions.

The price of the solution can vary substantially. If you have the simplest access point, such as the model R350, or if you have a very advanced installation based in crowded areas with model R850, the pricing is very different.

My advice to others is for them to try Ruckus Wireless WAN out, mostly as a cloud solution. That's a very good start. You can start with one or two access points and figure out if it's something that fits your needs.

I rate Ruckus Wireless WAN a ten out of ten.

We use Ruckus to cover high-density areas with wireless solutions. This includes schools, airports, and anything in high-density areas. We have somewhere between 50 to 100 customers and they are mainly IT admins, IT managers, schools, hotels, universities, and army.

It's the coverage that is the most valuable feature, better than what Cisco or Aruba have, better than any other brand. And the number of concurrent clients that each action point can hold is very high.

I can't think of any area that needs improvement. It's an easy product to use, the dashboards and interface are very good.

They could include a firewall feature in the next release but even there it's not really necessary because if you have a wireless solution you have a firewall and all the network components. But if I have to come up with something that needs improved, it would be the firewall. 

We've been using the latest version of the product for the past two years. 

It's a very stable product.

It's a very scalable product.

The technical support is very good. 

I have previously worked with Meraki and Aruba. We switched to Ruckus because it's more stable and easier. The technical features are very good and it's very useful if you need a wireless solution, it's very good. A good point about Aruba is that the firewall is better than what Ruckus has. But if you need a wireless solution, Ruckus is very good. 

The initial setup is very straightforward. You just move from one step to the next and then it's done. It's very good. I did the setup myself, as a technical person I have that experience and can do it myself. If you need some assistance, technical support can help. 

I don't know about the price because I'm a technical person. I'm not in sales so I don't know how it's priced. 

I would rate this product a nine out of 10. It's wonderful.

I use the product for internet connectivity.

The product is very user-friendly. The configurations are very simple, and the connections are very stable.

The interface has to be more automated.

I have been using the solution for 30 months.

I rate the solution’s stability an eight out of ten.

I rate the product’s scalability a nine out of ten.

I rate the ease of setup an eight out of ten.

It took us two days to deploy the solution.

I rate the pricing a six out of ten.

I am using the latest version of the solution. I would recommend the solution to others. Overall, I rate the product a nine out of ten.

The primary use case of this solution is wireless networking for small businesses.

The performance is very nice, the throughput is better than any other product, and it's reliable.

On the technical side, it is very easy to troubleshoot. I am working with an ISP and we provide the service to the customers and we monitor it for troubleshooting tasks. Ruckus is much easier than other products.

I have checked with other vendors and for a cloud-based service, Ruckus the fastest and the easiest.

The pricing needs to be reconsidered because it's expensive.

This solution is stable.

This solution is scalable.

The support is good. It is not a problem to open a ticket with Ruckus for Technical Support.

I have been in this field for fifteen years. At first, I started with Cisco then to Aruba, and in the last three years, I started working with Ruckus.

I am frequently working with these three products, and as recent as last week, I have started with Fortinet.

The initial setup is very nice and it's straightforward.

The solution is a little pricey, so customers sometimes select other products because of the price.

They have other cheaper models, but compared to other cheaper solutions it is not the best.

I will always ask customers first if they have a specific vendor in mind and if they say no, then I always refer them to the Ruckus solution because of the technical aspects.

I am not involved in sales or the pricing but it's expensive.

It has very good speed, for the current user, the quantity is more. Ruckus is the first vendor who has declared access by live access points.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten.