Ubiquiti Wireless Reviews

An area for improvement is availability - I sometimes have to wait weeks for their equipment.

The technical support is less than stellar.

From a pricing point of view, Ubiquiti is excellent. They charge around $180 per access point, and the switches are around $1,100, including support and a limited warranty.

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. I'd rate this solution as nine out of ten.

We use the tool internally and for client portfolios.

We had a client with a power plant. Different wireless devices from various brands caused problems. We fixed it using the Ubiquiti Wireless UDM controller and installed 75 access points and antennas.

The tool's most valuable feature is SD-WAN. It is easy to use and manage. In terms of reliability, we don't get many tickets or a service request after the installation. It's like installing and forgetting the device. In one railway construction project where we installed Ubiquiti three years ago, we've only received two inquiries since then. We provide remote support.

The solution has very good product lines. However, it feels like some models overlap. For example, a new model is announced after three months, and another new model is announced shortly after. So, the release cycle feels too short, and some features overlap. Overall, the products are very good and reliable.

I have been using the product for five years.

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten.

Combining internal users within our organization and clients in our existing managed service, we have approximately 3,000-3,500 users using Ubiquiti Wireless. I rate its scalability a nine out of ten.

I rated technical support as an eight out of ten because we rarely need to call them. Instead, we usually email the community or local distributors for support, and they assist us. However, in terms of implementation, we don't rely on technical support.

Positive

I used Aruba, Meraki, D-Link, and Cisco before Ubiquiti Wireless. We chose to switch from Cisco, Aruba, and Meraki to Ubiquiti Wireless mainly because most clients prefer cost-effective solutions. While brands like Aruba and Cisco are expensive. Ubiquiti is a US brand.

Our organization handles Ubiquiti Wireless maintenance and troubleshooting internally. We also provide managed services for some clients, managing all the day-to-day transactions and monitoring their wireless networks. We have about eight wireless engineers responsible for all technical aspects, including deployment and maintenance of Ubiquiti Wireless and other technical tasks.

The tool doesn't have any licensing costs.

We don't solely rely on built-in firewall features for enterprise-level security. Instead, we often use another brand or third-party firewall the client prefers as the primary defense. For clients with less sensitive data transactions or those running via the cloud, we trust the firewall features of Ubiquiti's UDM Pro.

I rate the solution overall as a nine out of ten. There's always room for improvement, and we anticipate future developments and innovations.

Ubiquiti wireless is quite good for us, especially in terms of price and functionality. We often provide maintenance services to companies for their internal land areas, and we rent or sell access points to them for Wi-Fi access. Additionally, we provide support for their internal network, which is why we use Ubiquiti access points.

We mostly use Ubiquiti solutions due to their affordable price. We sell to a lot of small businesses that only require basic Wi-Fi functionality in their offices or shops, and they don't need many features or management options. So we opt for Ubiquiti products. 

As for bigger projects and larger clients, we let them choose, and they sometimes go for products from vendors like Aruba. However, bigger companies usually make their own choice, and we are able to provide some vendors but not point them toward a specific system.

Three years ago, we were only selling Ubiquiti access points to small companies that needed only one access point.

They had issues with having more than one access point at the time. However, in the past year, we have been selling more and more Ubiquiti access points because those issues have been resolved, and we can now provide more than one access point. It is due to management improvements or some features currently working together correctly in the office.

Therefore, the most valuable feature is more access points. In the past, getting access points delivered and purchased was quite difficult. One of the options was to use Ubiquiti, which was much easier to obtain than Aruba, which took longer to get access points.

We use a program that creates heat maps for our customers. I'm not sure if Ubiquiti has some features like that, but sometimes we only have a floor plan of the office and need to determine how many access points and which models to propose to the customer. In such cases, we use those programs from other vendors.

We provide managed services, rent out the equipment and take care of the internal network support. Central monitoring is the main functionality that should be included in the product we offer to bigger customers. It could improve the quality of implementation, help in integration, and provide better metrics.

I've been working with Ubiquiti wireless for about two years now.

We have not had many problems with our existing customers who use it extensively.

Currently, Ubiquiti has no issues with scalability, so there are no problems in scaling that network and the conference off.

We haven't had any problems with deployment.

Our team is experienced in networking. Most of our customers already have existing cloud solutions and products with us. Sometimes we know about their network and switches and provide Internet for them, so it's quite easy.

It's just configuring the access point, sometimes at our or the customer's office, and then mounting them under the ceiling or wherever the company wants them.

Our team does the hard work of mounting the access points. We haven't heard of any problems with deployment.

Ubiquiti is one of the cheaper options among its competitors. The company usually does not have much product information when it chooses the vendor. And others choose the solutions, like HP and others, because these solutions have a stronger brand in the market.

Whereas, we have compared with the other providers in our market. And for small businesses, the first option is to choose less expensive products. So, of course, the biggest products we're selling are because of the low price.

We had some issues a few years ago. That's why we were selling only to those customers who needed only one access point, such as small shops or offices with ten people. Now, we don't have any problems. 

We need to provide one vendor access point, and we have some issues with customers with another vendor, like Ruckus. We used to work a lot with Ruckus vendor access points, but we're buying fewer now because they have bad delivery times. If we want to buy a new one and have many customers who now have Ruckus, we have difficulties getting a new one or changing it. We are thinking about changing all the office access points to Ubiquiti.

Currently, I see the best value for price in the market regarding Ubiquiti wireless. Also, the delivery time is quite good, and we haven't had any problems. We are using a few models like Long Range, Pro, Wi-Fi 6, NeoGen, and J2028, and they have everything that small and medium businesses need. So, I would recommend this solution to other people.

Overall, I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. We are happy with the solution and increasing its usage.

We primarily use the solution for wireless connectivity. It's for mobile management. It can manage my switches and everything via mobile. 

It is very user-friendly.

The solution is very straightforward in comparison to other solutions. It's quite quick to deploy.

The solution is stable.

It is scalable. 

It offers very good pricing. 

We'd like the solution to be more stable and have fewer firmware upgrades. More features should be available straight out of the box. It could be less complex and offer more simple principles.

I've been using the solution for a year and a half.

It's very stable. It is reliable. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze. The performance is good. 

My understanding is the solution can scale. 

We have four or five people using the solution. It's just for home usage. 

I've never needed the help of technical support. I can't speak to how helpful or responsive they are. 

We do not use any other solutions at this time.

It is quite straightforward to set up the solution. It is not overly complex. The deployment was fast and took less than a day.

The setup can be done in-house. There was no need to have any integrators or consultants involved. 

The pricing is quite low and very affordable. I'm not sure of the exact cost.

I did not attempt to evaluate other options before beginning to use the solution. 

We have a mixed environment. The APIs are obviously on-prem, and all the management is in the cloud.

I'm using the latest version of the solution. 

I'd recommend the solution to others. 

If you want a low-cost option, if you don't have the budget, I'd advise you go for Ubiquiti.

I would rate the solution eight out of ten.

In my company, we use Ubiquiti Wireless since it is a very simple product that is very useful for the IT team in our company who manages our office network.

The most valuable feature of the solution is that it is a simple and useful tool that offers good performance.

The documentation and support provided by the solution areas of concern where improvements are required. If some error occurs in the solution, it is not easy to find a person to help you with the troubleshooting process, and moreover, the product doesn't have an online community website to help users.

I have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for a year. I am a customer of the product.

It is a stable solution. Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

In our company, twelve people use the product.

My company probably has plans to increase the usage of the product.

I have experience with Meraki.

The product's initial setup phase was easy.

The solution is deployed with the help of a router, switch, and Wi-Fi.

The solution can be deployed in an hour.

There is a professional person to handle this step-by-step process of setting up the device.

One person, who is the main engineer in our company, is required to take care of the deployment and maintenance processes of the product.

Ubiquiti Wireless is a cheaply priced product.

Ubiquiti Wireless requires a user to undergo a very easy setup phase, and it is a cheap product.

I rate the overall tool a ten out of ten.

The primary use cases of this solution include home use and hospitality, for example: small cafes, etc. It's used in most small businesses where they just need a few ITs and they need simple management, which also means that they're not too worried about the security.

Cost is a big value to the customer and that's the main thing with Ubiquiti Wireless. They don't really have any features that stand out, that would distinguish them from other vendors, so it's all about their pricing. The most attractive thing about them is their cost.

What would make this solution better is improved security. Nowadays, with consumer and enterprise level, most of the access points that I work with, e.g. Aruba, Cambium, or Ruckus, etc., they have firewalls built into the access points and they can do deep packet inspection of data coming through the access point. This gives you the ability to identify applications and you can secure and manage based on application. Ubiquiti Wireless is already simplified, so they don't do that.

The performance of Ubiquiti Wireless also needs some improvement. Though performance is very difficult to quantify because if it's performance based on one or two access points in a home, Ubiquiti Wireless is fantastic, but their performance is lacking in large environments. They end up creating problems in larger environments.

I've had people put this in and because Ubiquiti Wireless doesn't solve tune and they weren't capable of tuning it themselves, they ended up with six access points, but the power and the channel assignments have been all wrong, so they haven't been getting any benefit out of the access points.

Ubiquiti Wireless also tends to turn the access points up to the maximum power, and if you're designing an enterprise network, you need to actually turn the power down on your access point and increase the density of your access points to give proper performance improvements. They're not an enterprise product. They're a home and consumer and small business product.

Scalability is an issue. Ease of manageability at scale is also an issue. For example, looking at one of its competitors: Aruba, you can easily scale that to 500 to a thousand access points and still have it all under control.

You also have the ability to do software-defined wireless networking with competitors of Ubiquiti Wireless, which is something you can't really do with Ubiquiti. Ubiquiti Wireless is a point solution.

I have a long list of things that they've got to do to improve the product. There's so many things that they need to do. One of the things that is quite important is that they get rid of the cloud key and have smart insight and access points.

With the other vendors, you buy the access points, then access the virtual controller which will give you that connection into your cloud management. With Ubiquiti Wireless, you have to buy a separate cloud key, or you have to run a separate software server, or you have to buy a Dream Machine Pro or a Dream Machine just to manage your network remotely. They need to move away from that and move to clustering and Virtual Controller in their IP.

I've been working with Ubiquiti Wireless for two years.

If I we're to rate the stability of Ubiquiti Wireless, I'll rate it a six out ten. They have a reputation of crashing when you do a firmware update sometimes.

Ubiquiti Wireless is not easy to scale. Scalability is a problem. Get your five AP (access points) and you're fine, but if you want to put 50 AP, you'll have a big problem. It's not scalable.

Another thing is from the management perspective with cloud keys and the way that they use cloud keys, it isn't scalable.

It's also not multi-tenanted, so you can't really use it. When you have multiple branches and sites, management becomes a big problem.

Ubiquiti Wireless doesn't have any support that you can call. I've used their online support and it's not great. Part of their value proposition is they're super cheap because there's no tech that you can call. You can't find an engineer to speak to, or to help you.

A lot of the support is done through the online portal, so if you want technical answers on how to fix issues, you have to go to the community. After everything's installed, they make people figure out issues and solutions for themselves. Their support documentation is not fantastic.

Setting up Ubiquiti Wireless is very simple, very basic.

To set up a network: getting access points installed, and depending on what I was using for a firewall, and getting an SSID secured and set up, it takes 20 to 30 minutes. That does not include mounting it anywhere, but just getting it out of the box, connecting it to a switch, then actually getting it configured. It's straightforward.

The price point for Ubiquiti Wireless is really good.

I've worked with Aruba Networks Wireless WAN, Cambium, and Ruckus Wireless WAN.

I'm a wireless specialist. That's what I do. I design wireless and put them in.

Deployment of Ubiquiti Wireless depends on the customers, but it's not deployed on my premises. I sell it and I design it. I'm an engineer who designs for customers, so we deploy it in different scenarios, but mostly it's deployed into the small business type of environments.

This solution requires regularly maintenance. You have to do firmware updates, and that's it.

My advice to people looking into using this product is that first of all, it would depend on what they are doing. What type of network implementation are they going to do?

Before I give advice, I would be asking a lot of questions. If Ubiquiti Wireless will be used in an educational institution, or in an institution that requires a higher level of security, or one that requires ease of management or good scalability, I will tell them not to use it.

If it will be used in a little cafe and they want to put two access points in, and they want a little guest network that people can sign in, and they want people to be able to log in through Facebook, etc., then using Ubiquiti Wireless will be fine.

Ubiquiti Wireless is a seven out of ten for me, because of its target market, and it does what it's supposed to do in the market it's supposed to be in. It's really good for its price point and for its target market.

I work with Ingram Micro and we sell a large amount of Ubiquiti Wireless, and there's a lot of SME that use them quite successfully. It's just that large implementations can become a huge challenge with this solution.

We are using Ubiquiti Wireless in a small environment. I am also involved in selling and using Ubiquiti products. We have been using products such as the Pro, AC Pro as an access point, and UDM Pro Plus for over ten years.

The seamless roaming feature was significant at the beginning, making it easier to grow into the system. The whole provisioning, configuration, and adapting process is user-friendly and considered an industry-standard in our environment. The centralized configuration with a graphical interface was a unique feature when we started, and it remains beneficial. It allows for easy deployment and expansion.

The firmware updates can sometimes be too quick and have flaws, especially for early access users. The availability of products has improved but could still be better, as there were delays in the past. There are limited wireless camera options in the Ubiquiti range, which is an area they could expand.

We have been using Ubiquiti Wireless for over ten years.

The product has been very reliable. We never experienced an outage with Ubiquiti, even in our small environments with around sixty clients and eight access points.

For standard networks and small environments, Ubiquiti offers flexible scalability. It is easy to grow by adding new devices.

Before Ubiquiti Wireless, we used products from Netgear, Aruba, and Ruckus. We switched because Ubiquiti provided a centralized configuration with a graphical interface, which was attractive and practical for our needs.

The initial setup was quite straightforward. The configuration interface is user-friendly and doesn't require top specialists.

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.

We evaluated products from Netgear, Aruba, Ruckus, and Mikrotik. Ubiquiti's combination of features and price was more suited to our needs.

I would rate Ubiquiti Wireless nine out of ten over the last ten years. I am very happy with the product.

The solution has a user-friendly interface. It has many essential features, including encryption. 

The solution's stability and setup process could be better. Also, there could be a LAN controller feature similar to Ruckus in Ubiquiti's next release.

We have been using the solution for two years.

The solution is stable. Although, we encounter stability issues in crowded areas.

The solution is suitable for small and medium businesses. We have 20-25 users in our organization.

I refer to support documentation in the case of queries for the solution. It is good and helpful.

The solution's initial setup could be more straightforward. It takes half an hour to complete tests and finish the process after installation.

The solution's price is reasonable for a basic device.

Compared with the solution, Ruckus has a lot of software and tools for wireless functionality. It also has a LAN controller feature which is not available in Ubiquiti. I prefer using Ruckus or Cisco products while working for large companies.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten.